Risk of Malignancies in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Rituximab: Analyses of Global Postmarketing Safety Data and Long-Term Clinical Trial Data

Risk Stratification of Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis and Ankylosing Spondylitis for Treatment with Tofacitinib: A Review of Current Clinical Data

In this commentary, we review clinical data which helps inform individualized benefit-risk assessment for tofacitinib in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). ORAL Surveillance, a safety trial of patients ≥ 50 years of age with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and cardiovascular risk factors, found increased rates of safety outcomes (including major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE], malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer, and venous thromboembolism) with tofacitinib versus tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi). Post hoc analyses of ORAL Surveillance have identified subpopulations with different relative risk versus TNFi; higher risk with tofacitinib was confined to patients ≥ 65 years of age and/or long-time current/past smokers, and specifically for MACE, patients with a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). In patients without these risk factors, risk differences between tofacitinib and TNFi could not be detected. Given differences in demographics, pathophysiology, and comorbidities, we sought to examine whether the risk stratification observed in RA is also appropriate for PsA and AS. Data from the PsA tofacitinib development program show low absolute risk of safety outcomes in patients < 65 years of age and never smokers, and low MACE risk in patients with no history of ASCVD, consistent with results from ORAL Surveillance. No MACE, malignancies, or venous thromboembolism were reported in the tofacitinib AS development program. The mechanism of the ORAL Surveillance safety findings is unknown, and there are no similar prospective studies of sufficient size and duration. Accordingly, it is appropriate to use a precautionary approach and extrapolate differentiating risk factors identified from ORAL Surveillance (age ≥ 65 years, long-time current/past smoking, and history of ASCVD) to PsA and AS. We recommend an individualized approach to treatment decisions based on these readily identifiable risk factors, in line with updated labeling for Janus kinase inhibitors and international guidelines for the treatment of PsA and AS.Trial Registration: NCT02092467, NCT01262118, NCT01484561, NCT00147498, NCT00413660, NCT00550446, NCT00603512, NCT00687193, NCT01164579, NCT00976599, NCT01059864, NCT01359150, NCT02147587, NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT01039688, NCT02281552, NCT02187055, NCT02831855, NCT00413699, NCT00661661, NCT01877668, NCT01882439, NCT01976364, NCT00678210, NCT01710046, NCT01241591, NCT01186744, NCT01276639, NCT01309737, NCT01163253, NCT01786668, NCT03502616.

Biologics Versus JAK Inhibitors. Part I: Cancer Risk. A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Biological drugs (BD) and Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have revolutionized the treatment of diverse dermatoses. However, there are concerns regarding their safety, especially the risk of cancer and opportunistic infections. Here, we discuss the risk of cancer associated with the BD and JAKi used in dermatology.

METHODS

A narrative review was carried out. All relevant articles evaluating the risk of cancer associated with BD or JAKi and published between January 2010 and February 2024 were selected.

RESULTS

Multiple large studies have evaluated the association between BD, JAKi and cancer risk. However, there is a lack of prospective, comparative studies. Overall, patients undergoing BD and JAKi present a cutaneous cancer incidence similar to that in the general population. The drugs more strongly associated with non-skin cancer risk were anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNFs) agents and JAKi (especially tofacitinib and oral ruxolitinib). This risk appears to increase with age, the presence of other factors (such as chronic immunosuppression from previous drugs or other comorbidities), and specific diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and myelodysplastic syndrome. Conversely, BD such as interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors may even reduce the risk of some visceral and hematological malignancies. In patients with dermatological conditions such as psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, the risk of malignancies may be lower than in other subgroups, and probably comparable to the general population.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of cancer in patients undergoing BD or JAKi is generally low. This incidence can be higher in elderly patients with RA or myelodysplastic syndrome, and in those undergoing prolonged therapy with tofacitinib or ruxolitinib (oral), or anti-TNF agents.

Long-term safety of biologic and targeted synthetic disease modifying drugs in rheumatology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The landscape for treatment of rheumatic diseases is ever evolving, with several new drugs recently approved across diseases and more in the pipeline. This timely review aims to highlight the latest literature on long-term safety profiles of salient established and emerging biologic (b) and targeted synthetic (ts) disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

RECENT FINDINGS

The risk of infection remains elevated with the use of most b and tsDMARDs, with specifically risk of hepatitis B reactivation with rituximab and zoster infection with JAK inhibitors (JAKi). The results of the ORAL surveillance trial led to new black box warnings for JAKi and evoked critical risk-benefit discussions surrounding JAKi and DMARDs overall.

SUMMARY

Such well conducted trials are needed to gather long term comparative safety data of DMARDs. In the interim, real world observational studies also have a role to play in our understanding of long-term drug safety, provided that detailed attention is paid to minimize biases inherent in observational studies.

Cancer risk with biologic and targeted synthetic DMARDs in patients with rheumatic diseases and previous malignancies: Results from the BIOBADASER register

OBJECTIVE

to investigate the occurrence and relative risk of incident malignancy in patients with rheumatic diseases and previous malignancies treated with biologic and targeted synthetic DMARDs (b/tsDMARDs).

METHODS

Cohort study of patients included in BIOBADASER 3.0 up to 2021, treated with b/tsDMARDs and history of a previous malignancy. Incident cancer was defined as any cancer (new primary, local recurrence or metastases) during the drug exposure. Incidence rate ratios of cancer per 1,000 patients-year (PY) and 95 % confidence interval (CI) were estimated. Rates of incident cancer in tsDMARDs and other bDMARDs versus TNFi were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 352 patients from over 9,129 patients recorded in BIOBADASER 3.0 had a history of a previous malignancy. Overall, there were 47 incident malignancies (28 solid cancers, 18 non-melanoma skin cancers and 1 melanoma). The overall rate of incident malignancy was 47.4 (95 % CI 35.6-63.1) events/1,000 PY, ranging between 24.5 events/1000 PY in the anti-CD20 group to 93 events/1000 PY in the anti-CTLA-4 group. We did not find differences in the adjusted rate of incident cancer in patients exposed to JAKi [0.5 (95 % CI 0.2-1.7)], anti-CD20 [0.4(95 % CI 0.1-1)], or anti-IL6 [1.1(95 % CI 0.5-2.4)], anti-CTLA-4 [1.5 (95 % CI 0.7-3.1) or anti-IL17 [0.7 (95 % CI 0.2-2.4) versus TNFi therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find differences in the risk of incident cancer in patients with rheumatic diseases and a previous malignancy between TNFi and other b/tsDMARDs. While incident cancers in our cohort were limited, our data is reassuring, awaiting validation in future studies.

Malignancy risk in kidney transplant recipients exposed to immunosuppression pre-transplant for the treatment of glomerulonephritis

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplant patients with glomerulonephritis (GN) as their native disease may receive significant amounts of pre-transplant immunosuppression (PTI), which could increase the risk for development of malignancy post-transplant.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center, retrospective study of kidney transplant recipients from January 2005 until May 2020. Patients with GN as their native kidney disease who received PTI for treatment of GN (n = 184) were compared with a control cohort (n = 579) of non-diabetic, non-PTI-receiving kidney transplant patients. We calculated hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for outcomes of first occurrence of solid or hematologic malignancy, non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) and post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD).

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up of 5.7 years, PTI for GN was associated with significantly increased risk for malignancy compared with controls [13.0%  vs 9.7%, respectively; adjusted HR 1.82 (95% CI 1.10-3.00)], but not for NMSC [10.3% vs 11.4%, respectively; adjusted HR 1.09 (95% CI 0.64-1.83)] or PTLD [3.3% vs 3.1%, respectively; adjusted HR 1.02 (95% CI 0.40-2.61)]. The risk for malignancy was significantly increased in those who received cyclophosphamide [HR 2.59 (95% CI 1.48-4.55)] or rituximab [HR 3.82 (95% CI 1.69-8.65)] pre-transplant, and particularly in those who received both cyclophosphamide and rituximab, but not for calcineurin inhibitors or mycophenolate.

CONCLUSION

The use of PTI for treatment of GN, especially cyclophosphamide or even with rituximab, is associated with increased risk for development of solid or hematologic malignancy post-transplant. These data highlight potential risks with treatment of GN and underscore the importance of post-transplant malignancy surveillance in this patient population.

IgA nephropathy in adults with epidermolysis bullosa

Epidermolysis bullosa (EB) is a devastating genetic condition caused by mutations in genes that give rise to aberrant proteins. There are 16 different such proteins implicated in EB that are important in maintaining the integrity of the dermoepidermal junction. It is classified into four major subtypes: (i) EB simplex; (ii) junctional EB (JEB); (iii) dystrophic EB (DEB); and (iv) Kindler EB. Renal disease is a recognized complication of EB and the aetiology is complex. We describe our experience of managing five patients with EB and IgA nephropathy. We recommend that patients with recessive DEB and JEB routinely have the following monitored: renal function, urinary albumin/creatinine ratio, urine analysis, serum albumin levels and immunoglobulins; specifically serum IgA. Management of IgA nephropathy in the context of EB should be tailored to the individual and be carried out within a specialist multidisciplinary team. Our case series provides important insights into the treatment of IgA nephropathy in patients with EB and will help inform treatment in this rare genetic disease. Case series and reports like ours are key in gaining real-life data to quantify the actual risk of morbidity and mortality from each of the treatment modalities discussed.

Identification of two tofacitinib subpopulations with different relative risk versus TNF inhibitors: an analysis of the open label, randomised controlled study ORAL Surveillance

OBJECTIVES

Based on primary results from ORAL Surveillance, an event-driven clinical trial of risk-enriched patients, identify subpopulations with different relative risk (ie, 'high-risk' and 'low-risk') with tofacitinib versus tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi).

METHODS

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis aged ≥50 years with ≥1 additional cardiovascular risk factor received tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg two times a day or TNFi. Prior analyses had identified age and smoking as risk factors of particular interest across safety outcomes. Hazard ratios (HRs) and incidence rates were evaluated by age and smoking individually and in combination. Results were validated across tofacitinib development programmes.

RESULTS

'Age ≥65 years or ever smoker' defined a group ('high-risk') with increased risk of malignancies (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer), major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, venous thromboembolism and all-cause death with tofacitinib (combined doses) versus TNFi (HRs 1.41-5.19). In patients 'aged <65 years and never smokers' ('low-risk'), there was no detectable risk increase with tofacitinib versus TNFi (HRs ≈1.0) up to 6 years of follow-up, and absolute risk remained low and was corroborated across tofacitinib rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ulcerative colitis programmes with up to 10 years of observation.

CONCLUSIONS

This posthoc analysis of ORAL Surveillance identified two tofacitinib subpopulations with different relative risk versus TNFi. High risk was confined to patients defined by distinct risk factors age ≥65 years or smoking, and these differentiating risk factors accounted for the excess risk observed with tofacitinib versus TNFi. These findings can guide individualised benefit/risk assessment and clinical decision-making on treatment with tofacitinib.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

NCT02092467, NCT01262118, NCT01484561, NCT00147498, NCT00413660, NCT00550446, NCT00603512, NCT00687193, NCT01164579, NCT00976599, NCT01059864, NCT01359150, NCT02147587, NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT01039688, NCT02281552, NCT02187055, NCT02831855, NCT00413699, NCT00661661, NCT00787202, NCT01465763, NCT01458951, NCT01458574, NCT01470612, NCT01877668, NCT01882439, NCT01976364.

Anti-CD20 therapies in multiple sclerosis: From pathology to the clinic

The immune system plays a significant role in multiple sclerosis. While MS was historically thought to be T cell-mediated, multiple pieces of evidence now support the view that B cells are essential players in multiple sclerosis pathogenic processes. High-efficacy disease-modifying therapies that target the immune system have emerged over the past two decades. Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies selectively deplete CD20+ B and CD20+ T cells and efficiently suppress inflammatory disease activity. These monotherapies prevent relapses, reduce new or active magnetic resonance imaging brain lesions, and lessen disability progression in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Rituximab, ocrelizumab, and ofatumumab are currently used in clinical practice, while phase III clinical trials for ublituximab have been recently completed. In this review, we compare the four anti-CD20 antibodies in terms of their mechanisms of action, routes of administration, immunological targets, and pharmacokinetic properties. A deeper understanding of the individual properties of these molecules in relation to their efficacy and safety profiles is critical for their use in clinical practice.

Management of Cancer-Associated Myositis

Purpose of the Review

Cancer-associated myositis (CAM) is defined as when cancer appears within 3 years of myositis onset. Dermatomyositis and seronegative immune–mediated necrotizing myopathy are the phenotypes mostly related to cancer. In general, treatment principles in myositis patients with and without CAM are similar. However, some aspects of myositis management are particular to CAM, including (a) the need for a multidisciplinary approach and a close relationship with the oncologist, (b) the presence of immunosuppressive and antineoplastic drug interactions, and (c) the role of the long-term immunosuppressive therapy as a risk factor for cancer relapse or development of a second neoplasm. In this review, we will also discuss immunotherapy in patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors as a treatment for their cancer.

Recent Findings

Studies on cancer risk in patients treated with long-term immunosuppressive drugs, in autoimmune diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus or rheumatoid arthritis, and in solid organ transplant recipients have shed some light on this topic. Immunotherapy, which has been a great advance for the treatment of some types of malignancy, may be also of interest in CAM, given the special relationship between both disorders.

Summary

Management of CAM is a challenge. In this complex scenario, therapeutic decisions must consider both diseases simultaneously.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40674-022-00197-2.

Inflammation-targeted therapies and cancer

OBJECTIVE

To review and analyze the current knowledge on the risk of malignancy associated with inflammation-targeted therapies in rheumatic diseases.

METHODS

We performed a non-systematic literature review on PubMEd MEDLINE by screening randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, reviews, and observational studies focusing on malignancies and inflammation-targeted therapies including TNF inhibitors, other biologics and JAK inhibitors in rheumatic diseases.

RESULTS

Data from literature are reassuring regarding the overall risk of incident and recurrent cancer with TNF inhibitors. The risk of lymphoma is more difficult to analyze and data are controversial; however, in most of the studies, this risk does not seem to be significanlty increased. By contrast, there is probably an increased risk of non-melanoma skin cancer associated with TNF inhibitors, as with other immunosuppressants. There is no signal for an increased risk of malignancies with other biological DMARDs, but additional data are needed. A recent post-marketing surveillance study found out an increased risk of malignancies for tofacitinib compared with TNFi; additional data are, therefore, urgently needed to confirm or not these results.

CONCLUSION

Data are presently reassuring regarding the overall risk of cancer, whatever the inflammation-targeted treatment. However, additional data are needed for non-TNF biologics and JAK-inhibitors.

Impact of rheumatoid arthritis and biologic and targeted synthetic disease modifying antirheumatic agents on cancer risk and recurrence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Several new therapeutic drugs are now available for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Given that RA has been associated with an increased risk of certain cancers like lymphoma and lung cancer, concern remains about the safety of (newer) immunosuppressants used in RA management as it relates to the risk of cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Most meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) have not observed an association between TNFi and risk of incident cancer. Studies of non-TNFi biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic DMARDs and cancer are also reassuring but limited and of short-term follow-up. Regarding the use of DMARDs in patients with RA and a prior malignancy, retrospective studies have shown that TNFi use is not associated with recurrence.

SUMMARY

There is a need for ongoing studies on the safety of non-TNFi bDMARDs and targeted synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and recurrent cancer. Further research is also needed to guide the patients, rheumatologists, and oncologists regarding the safest DMARDs to choose for patients with RA and a recent diagnosis of cancer.

Biologic Drugs for Rheumatoid Arthritis in the Context of Biosimilars, Genetics, Epigenetics and COVID-19 Treatment

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affects around 1.2% of the adult population. RA is one of the main reasons for work disability and premature retirement, thus substantially increasing social and economic burden. Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) were shown to be an effective therapy especially in those rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, who did not adequately respond to conventional synthetic DMARD therapy. However, despite the proven efficacy, the high cost of the therapy resulted in limitation of the widespread use and unequal access to the care. The introduction of biosimilars, which are much cheaper relative to original drugs, may facilitate the achievement of the therapy by a much broader spectrum of patients. In this review we present the properties of original biologic agents based on cytokine-targeted (blockers of TNF, IL-6, IL-1, GM-CSF) and cell-targeted therapies (aimed to inhibit T cells and B cells properties) as well as biosimilars used in rheumatology. We also analyze the latest update of bDMARDs' possible influence on DNA methylation, miRNA expression and histone modification in RA patients, what might be the important factors toward precise and personalized RA treatment. In addition, during the COVID-19 outbreak, we discuss the usage of biologicals in context of effective and safe COVID-19 treatment. Therefore, early diagnosing along with therapeutic intervention based on personalized drugs targeting disease-specific genes is still needed to relieve symptoms and to improve the quality of life of RA patients.

Risk of Malignancy and Biologic Therapy in Rheumatic Inflammatory Diseases: A Single-center Experience

Objectives

Biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) have significantly improved the care of patients with rheumatic muscle-skeletal disorders (RMDs). Considering their immunosuppressive action, a theoretical increase of malignancy risk has been a major concern in the last few decades. The objective of this study is to analyze the incidence of malignancies in a cohort of patients affected by rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriathic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) treated with bDMARDs.

Methods

The charts of bDMARD-treated RMD patients were reviewed, and data about bDMARD exposure and malignant cancers (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) were collected.

Results

921 patients were included (median age: 50.59 years, 66.67% females); 1374 bDMARD treatments were administered, 87.12% were tumor necrosis factor inhibitors. A total of 21 malignant neoplasms were detected in 21 patients (61.90% females, median age at cancer diagnosis: 64.99 years), 66.67% in RA patients, 19.05% in PsA, and 14.28% in AS. Among them, 10 patients (47.62%) were treated with etanercept, 6 patients (28.57%) with adalimumab, and 1 case each with tocilizumab, certolizumab, golimumab, infliximab, and abatacept. The most common malignancies that we found were lung cancers, ductal mammary carcinomas, melanomas, and lymphomas. The incidence rate (IR) of malignancies in our cohort was 3.47 per 1000 person-years (p-y); the higher IRs were in RA patients (5.13 per 1000 p-y), in males (4.21 per 1000 p-y), and in patients aged >70 years (10.14 per 1000 p-y).

Conclusions

The results of our study showed IR of malignancies in RMD patients treated with bDMARDs that is in agreement with literature data.

Lessons for rituximab therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

B-cell depletion therapy is an effective option for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis but often does not result in complete B-cell depletion. Complete B-cell depletion after rituximab treatment is associated with clinical response, and this outcome leads to long-term maintenance of therapy. Low pretreatment plasmablast counts, concomitant treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, no smoking exposure, the presence of anticitrullinated protein antibodies or rheumatoid factor, and a low interferon signature are all predictive of complete B-cell depletion and clinical response. Half of patients who initially show complete B-cell depletion and clinical response after rituximab treatment eventually lose responsiveness with further infusions. However three-quarters of these patients regain this outcome in their following treatment cycle, suggesting that loss of response is reversible and that patients can still benefit from rituximab retreatment. The efficacy of reduced doses of rituximab is being investigated, but preliminary results suggest that these strategies are best used for maintenance therapy, particularly in patients who suffer adverse events or who are at a high risk of infection. Infusion-related reactions are the most common adverse events associated with rituximab treatment, and monitoring of IgG concentrations is crucial, as low concentrations are correlated with an increased risk of infection.