Vulnerability and Clinical Research: Mapping the Challenges for Stakeholders

[89Zr]-immuno-PET prediction of response to rituximab treatment in patients with therapy refractory interstitial pneumonitis: a phase 2 trial

INTRODUCTION

Immune-mediated interstitial pneumonitis may be treated with anti-CD20 therapy after failure of conventional therapies. However, clinical response is variable. It was hypothesized that autoreactive CD20-positive cells may play an important role in this variability. This prospective study aims to elucidate if imaging of CD20-positive cells in the lungs allows prediction of the response to anti-CD20 treatment.

METHODS

Twenty-one patients with immune-mediated interstitial lung disease (ILD) with deteriorated pulmonary function received a dose of 1000 mg rituximab on day 1 and day 14 spiked with a tracer dose of radiolabeled [89Zr]-rituximab. PET/CT was performed on days 3 and 6. Standardized uptake values (SUV) were calculated as a measure for pulmonary CD20 expression. Based on pulmonary function tests (PFT), forced vital capacity (FVC), and diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO), prior to and 6 months after treatment, patients were classified as responder (stable disease or improvement) or non-responder.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (71%) were classified as responder. Pulmonary [89Zr]-rituximab PET SUVmean was significantly correlated with the change in FVC and DLCO (K = 0.49 and 0.56, respectively) when using target-to-background ratios, but not when using SUVmean alone. [89Zr]-rituximab SUVmean was significantly higher in responders than in non-responders (0.35 SD 0.09 vs. 0.23 SD 0.06; P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Rituximab treatment was effective in the majority of patients. As a higher pulmonary uptake of [89Zr]-rituximab correlated with improvement of PFT and treatment outcome, [89Zr]-rituximab PET imaging may serve as a potential predictive biomarker for anti-CD20 therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02251964.

Transforming challenges into opportunities: conducting health preference research during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond

The disruptions to health research during the COVID-19 pandemic are being recognized globally, and there is a growing need for understanding the pandemic’s impact on the health and health preferences of patients, caregivers, and the general public. Ongoing and planned health preference research (HPR) has been affected due to problems associated with recruitment, data collection, and data interpretation. While there are no “one size fits all” solutions, this commentary summarizes the key challenges in HPR within the context of the pandemic and offers pragmatic solutions and directions for future research. We recommend recruitment of a diverse, typically under-represented population in HPR using online, quota-based crowdsourcing platforms, and community partnerships. We foresee emerging evidence on remote, and telephone-based HPR modes of administration, with further studies on the shifts in preferences related to health and healthcare services as a result of the pandemic. We believe that the recalibration of HPR, due to what one would hope is an impermanent change, will permanently change how we conduct HPR in the future.