Risk of malignancy associated with use of tocilizumab versus other biologics in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A multi-database cohort study

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.

Recommendations by the Spanish Society of Rheumatology on risk management of biological treatment and JAK inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To present recommendations based on the available evidence and the consensus of experts, for risk management of biological treatment and JAK inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

Clinical research questions relevant to the purpose of the document were identified. These questions were reformulated in PICO format (patient, intervention, comparison, outcome or outcome) by a panel of experts, selected based on their experience in the area. A systematic review of the evidence was carried out, grading according to the GRADE criteria (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Specific recommendations were then formulated.

RESULTS

6 PICO questions were proposed by the panel of experts based on their clinical relevance and the existence of recent information regarding the risk of occurrence of serious infections, the risk of reactivation of the hepatitis B virus, the risk of reactivation of the virus varicella-zoster, the risk of appearance of skin (melanoma and non-melanoma) or haematological cancer, the risk of appearance of thromboembolic disease and the risk of progression of the human papilloma virus. A total of 28 recommendations were formulated, structured by question, based on the evidence found and the consensus of the experts.

CONCLUSIONS

The SER recommendations on risk management of treatment with biologic therapies and JAK inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis are presented.

Comparison between rheumatoid arthritis with malignant lymphoma and other malignancies: Analysis of a National Database of Rheumatic Disease in Japan

BACKGROUND

The background status and the current treatment options of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who develop malignant lymphoma (ML) and other malignancies are unclear. This study investigated the differences in background factors between ML and other malignancies that occur in RA patients and post-malignancy treatment.

METHODS

We identified 935 RA patients with new-onset malignancies among 110,571 person-years registered in the National Database of Rheumatic Disease in Japan from 2012 to 2018. Analysis cohorts 1 and 2 included 597 and 490 patients with available data for 1 year before and after the development of malignancies, respectively. Factors associated with the development of ML were longitudinally evaluated by multiple logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 935 patients (mean age 70.5, standard deviation 9.9), 15.5% had ML; this was comparable to the rate of lung cancer (14.3%). In cohort 1, methotrexate (MTX), biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were used in 74.4%, 23.4%, and 56.7% of ML and in 56.8%, 25.4%, and 35.3% of other malignancies 1 year before the occurrence of malignancies. Clinical disease activity index (CDAI) and C-reactive protein were similar between the two groups. Multivariable analysis showed that MTX use (odds ratio [OR]: 2.22, 95% CI [confidence interval]: 1.32-3.73, p=0.003) and NSAID use (OR: 2.51, 95% CI: 1.58-3.98, p <0.001) were significantly associated with the development of ML versus other malignancies. However, this association was not observed with bDMARDs. In cohort 2, one year after the development of malignancies, MTX was used in none of ML and 41.8% of patients who developed other malignancies. In both malignancy groups, approximately 15% of patients received bDMARDs and 50% received glucocorticoids. IL-6 inhibitors were preferentially prescribed in patients with ML versus those with other malignancies. At year 1, CDAI remission was achieved in 37.3% and 31.1% of patients in the ML and other malignancy groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Patients receiving long-term treatment with MTX and NSAIDs may be at a relatively high risk of developing ML. The treatment landscape after developing malignancies differed considerably between patients with ML and other malignancies, and different treatment strategies should be established.

Safety of Immunomodulatory Systemic Therapies Used in the Management of Immune-Related Cutaneous Adverse Events

Immune-related cutaneous adverse events (ircAEs) commonly occur in patients on treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors and can significantly reduce patient quality of life. These are often treated with immunomodulatory agents, including glucocorticoids, immunosuppressants, and biologics. While often effective at managing symptoms, these therapies can cause several adverse events which may limit their use. In addition, immunomodulatory agents should be used with particular caution in patients receiving immunotherapy, as the efficacy of the oncologic regimen may potentially be undermined. In this review, we summarize the safety of systemic therapies that are used in the management of ircAEs, with a particular focus on the resultant risk of secondary tumor progression in patients with active cancer.

Safety of JAK and IL-6 inhibitors in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a multicenter cohort study

Background

The ORAL Surveillance trial showed a potentially higher incidence of malignancy and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) associated with tofacitinib than those associated with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (TNFis). However, few studies have compared the safety of non-TNFis or other Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors (JAKis). This study was aimed at comparing the incidence rates (IRs) of malignancies and MACEs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated using interleukin-6 (IL-6) inhibitors (IL-6is) or JAKis.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 427 patients with RA who were treated using an IL-6i (n = 273) or a JAKi (n = 154). We determined the IRs of malignancy and MACEs, and the standardized incidence ratio (SIR) of malignancies and investigated factors related to malignancy and MACEs. After adjusting the clinical characteristic imbalance by propensity score matching (PSM), we compared the IRs of adverse events between the JAKi and IL-6i groups.

Results

After PSM, the observational period was determined to be 605.27 patient-years (PY), and the median observational period was determined to be 2.28 years. We identified seven cases of malignancy (IR: 2.94 per 100 PY) in the JAKi-treated group and five cases (IR: 1.36 per 100 PY) in the IL-6i-treated group after PSM. The IR of MACEs was 2.56 and 0.83 (per 100 PY) in the JAKi- and IL-6i-treated groups. The IRRs of JAKi-treated patients versus IL-6i-treated patients were 2.13 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.67-7.42) for malignancy and 3.03 (95% CI: 0.77-15.21) for MACE. There were no significant differences in IRR for malignancy and MACE between both groups after PSM. Univariate and multivariable Cox regression analyses revealed that older age and JAKi use were independent risk factors for malignancy, while older age, hypertension, and JAKi use were independent risk factors for MACEs. The overall malignancy SIR was significantly higher in the JAKi-treated group compared to the general population (2.10/100 PY, 95% CI: 1.23-2.97).

Conclusion

The IRs of malignancy and MACE in patients with RA after PSM were comparable between IL-6i-treated and JAKi-treated patients. However, the SIR of malignancy in JAKi treatment was significantly higher than in the general population; therefore, further safety studies comparing JAKi to non-TNFi biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are needed.

Lymphoproliferative disorder risk after methotrexate treatment for rheumatoid arthritis

Methotrexate (MTX)-associated lymphoproliferative disorder (MTX-LPD) is a troublesome problem in patients receiving MTX for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, its incidence, prognosis, and risk factors remain unclear. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the actual incidence, prognostic impact, and risk factors of MTX-LPD. Of the 986 patients with RA treated with MTX, 90 patients experienced 95 new malignancies (NMs), with LPD as the most frequent in 26 patients. The cumulative LPD incidences were 1.3% and 4.7% at 5 and 10 years after MTX initiation, respectively. Among the 24 patients who discontinued MTX after developing LPD, 15 showed sustained regression, without difference in overall survival between patients with LPD and without NM. Inflammatory markers and absolute lymphocyte counts were not useful for early LPD development detection, but most of the patients with LPD had persistently elevated erythrocyte sedimentation ratios. Regarding concomitant drugs, tacrolimus increased the risk only if patients were not receiving biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). bDMARDs did not increase the risk for any of the drugs or the number of classes used. The number of LPD cases was lower in patients with IL-6A even after a long period after MTX, although with no statistically significant difference. Thus, approximately 1 in 20 patients with RA developed MTX-LPD over the 10 years of MTX treatment, but it did not affect the survival of patients with RA. Tacrolimus increased the risk of developing LPD for certain patients and should be used with caution.

Malignancies and rheumatoid arthritis, csDMARDs, biological DMARDs, and JAK inhibitors: challenge and outlook

INTRODUCTION

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disorder necessitating immunosuppressive therapy. Remarkable progress has been made in the treatment of RA over recent decades, particularly with the development of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi). Nonetheless, the development of new drugs has been accompanied by concerns regarding the association between these novel therapies and the risk of malignancy.

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review aims to discuss the understanding of RA, conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs, bDMARDs, JAKi, and their association with malignancy. Furthermore, the review discusses the management of malignancy in patients receiving b/tsDMARDs.

EXPERT OPINION

Although recent studies suggest that the potential risk of malignancy of methotrexate and a JAKi tofacitinib, it is essential to avoid indiscriminate withholding of treatment by those agents, as this may lead functional impairment and increased mortality. Therefore, the adoption of a Treat-to-Target (T2T) approach considering individual patient characteristics, becomes of utmost importance. Rheumatologists should maintain a vigilant stance regarding malignancy in this context, recognizing the importance of early detection and management. Implementing a screening program for malignancies is indispensable, and the use of computed tomography screening may enhance the effectiveness of management strategies.

Cancer screening in chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases

Cancer is a major public health concern, and screening for cancer is a on-going issue in our practice. The risk of cancer in patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases varies according to their personal medical history, underlying rheumatic disease and its treatment. However, to date, no rheumatology learned society has established specific recommendations for cancer screening in patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases. In this review, we provide an overview of the risk of cancer in chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases (related to the disease itself or its treatment), cancer screening in the general population and in immunocompromised subjects, and cancer screening in patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases.

Risk of melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer with immunosuppressants, part II: Methotrexate, alkylating agents, biologics, and small molecule inhibitors

In solid organ transplant recipients, skin cancer risk associated with posttransplant immunosuppression has been well-described, and screening practices generally reflect these risks. In addition to agents used posttransplant, other classes of immunosuppressants also have the potential to raise the risk of nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) or melanoma. In the present manuscript, the evidence for melanoma and NMSC risk associated with methotrexate, cyclophosphamide, biologic cytokine inhibitors including TNF (tumor necrosis factor)-alpha and interleukin inhibitors, costimulation blockers such as abatacept, integrin inhibitors such as natalizumab, targeted B-cell, and T-cell inhibitors including CD20 (cluster of differentiate 20), CD52, and BTK (Bruton's tyrosine kinase) inhibitors, and JAK (Janus kinase) inhibitors is reviewed. Based on the available data, we recommend regular skin cancer screening for select nontransplant patients receiving immunosuppressive regimens that are shown to raise the risk of NMSC or melanoma. We also offer suggestions for conscientious use of these therapies in high-risk patients. Finally, a comprehensive summary of the relative risk associated with each immunosuppressant class and associated recommendations is presented.

Cancer incidence in immunocompromised patients: a single-center cohort study

BACKGROUND

Diminished immune defense plays an important role in cancer development. Cancer risk in immunocompromised patients may differ. Identifying individuals with elevated cancer risk can inform strategies for routine cancer screening. This study aimed to understand and compare cancer incidence and risk in three patient groups: recipients of solid organ transplant (SOT) or hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT); diagnosis of primary or secondary immunodeficiency disorder (PID/SID); and recipients of tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNF-i) therapy.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used the University of Utah Health System database and Huntsman Cancer Institute tumor registry. Patients aged ≥18 years with SOT/HSCT, PID/SID or ≥ 3 months of TNF-i therapy were included. The date of transplant, diagnosis of PID/SID, or 1st TNF-i medication order date was defined as the index date. We calculated cumulative cancer incidence by Kaplan-Meier method. A Cox-proportional hazard regression model with a stepwise variable selection process was used to identify independent risk factors associated with the time to onset of a new primary cancer.

RESULTS

In total, 13,887 patients were included which comprised of 2982 (21%) SOT/HSCT, 7542 (54%) PID/SID and 3363 (24%) patients receiving TNF-i. The mean (SD) age ranged from 46.8 (15) years - 50.4 (18.2) years. The proportion of white patients ranged from 72.3-84.8%. The estimated cumulative cancer incidence was 11.5% in the SOT/HSCT cohort, 14.3% in the PID/SID cohort, and 8.8% in the TNF-i cohort. The multivariable model adjusted for age, benign in-situ disease, Charlson Comorbidity Index, hypertension/cardiovascular disease/end stage renal disease, gender, race/ethnicity, and renal cyst as significant risk factors. The adjusted hazard ratios for cancer development in SOT/HSCT and PID/SID cohorts compared to the TNF-i cohort over the full follow-up period were 1.57 (95% CI: 1.16-2.13) and 2.14 (95% CI: 1.65-2.77), respectively.

CONCLUSION

A significantly increased risk of cancer was observed in PID/SID patients and SOT/HSCT patients compared to TNF-i patients. Age ≥ 50 years, male gender, and clinical comorbidities were additional factors impacting cancer risk. PID/SID and SOT/HSCT patients may benefit from more intensive cancer screening.

Safety of synthetic and biological DMARDs: a systematic literature review informing the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

To perform a systematic literature review (SLR) concerning the safety of synthetic(s) and biological (b) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) to inform the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

SLR of observational studies comparing safety outcomes of any DMARD with another intervention in RA. A comparator group was required for inclusion. For treatments yet without, or limited, registry data, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were used.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine observational studies addressed the safety of DMARDs. Two studies (unclear risk of bias (RoB)) showed an increased risk of serious infections with bDMARDs compared with conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs. Herpes zoster infections occurred more with JAKi than csDMARDs (adjusted HR (aHR): 3.66) and bDMARDs (aHR: 1.9-2.3) (four studies, two low RoB). The risk of malignancies was similar across bDMARDs (five studies) and with tofacitinib compared with bDMARDs (one study, low RoB). The risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was similar with bDMARDs and tofacitinib (two studies, one low RoB). Thirty studies reported safety from RCTs, with one, designed to evaluate safety, showing that malignancies (HR (95% CI): 1.48 (1.04 to 2.09)) and MACE (HR (95% CI): 1.33 (0.91 to 1.94)) occurred numerically more frequently with tofacitinib (5 mg and 10 mg doses combined) than with TNFi in patients with cardiovascular risk factors. In this study, the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) was higher with tofacitinib 10 mg than with TNFi.

CONCLUSION

The safety profile of bDMARDs was further demonstrated. Whether the difference in incidence of malignancies, MACE and VTE between tofacitinib and TNFi applies to other JAKi needs further evaluation.

Tofacitinib and Risk of Malignancy: Results From the Safety of Tofacitinib in Routine Care Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis (STAR-RA) Study

OBJECTIVES

Results of the ORAL Surveillance safety trial have indicated that there is an increased risk for the development of malignancies with tofacitinib therapy when compared to treatment with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi). This study was undertaken to further examine this safety concern in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Using US insurance claims data from Optum Clinformatics (2012-2020), IBM MarketScan Research Databases (2012-2018), and Medicare (parts A, B, and D, 2012-2017), we created 2 cohorts of RA patients who had initiated treatment with tofacitinib or TNFi. The first cohort, designated the real-world evidence (RWE) cohort, included RA patients from routine care. For the second cohort, designated the randomized controlled trial (RCT)-duplicate cohort, we emulated the inclusion and exclusion criteria that were applied in the ORAL Surveillance trial of tofacitinib, which allowed us to assess the comparability of our results with the results of that trial. Cox proportional hazards models with propensity score fine-stratification weighting were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for the risk of any malignancy (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer). Database-specific estimates were meta-analyzed using fixed-effects models with inverse-variance weighting.

RESULTS

The RWE cohort consisted of 83,295 patients, including 10,504 patients (12.6%) who received treatment with tofacitinib. The pooled weighted HR for the primary outcome of any malignancy associated with tofacitinib treatment compared to any malignancy associated with TNFi therapy was 1.01 (95% CI 0.83, 1.22) in the RWE cohort and 1.17 (95% CI 0.85, 1.62) in the RCT-duplicate cohort (compared to the ORAL Surveillance trial HR of 1.48 [95% CI 1.04, 2.09]).

CONCLUSION

We did not find evidence of an increased risk of malignancy development with tofacitinib therapy, in comparison with TNFi therapy, in RA patients treated in a real-world setting. However, our results cannot rule out the possibility of an increase in risk that may accrue with a longer duration of treatment with tofacitinib.

Long-term outcomes in corticosteroid-refractory Graves' orbitopathy treated with tocilizumab

BACKGROUND

Up to 20% of patients with moderate to severe Graves' orbitopathy (GO) do not respond to high-dose glucocorticoids (GC). A few studies, including a randomized trial, have demonstrated the efficacy of interleukin-6 (IL-6) blockade with tocilizumab (TCZ) in GC-refractory GO. However, data on predictors of response to TCZ and long-term outcomes are lacking.

METHODS

Observational single-center study on ten consecutive patients treated with TCZ for GC-refractory GO, between 2016 and 2020. Median (interquartile range) follow-up was 24 (12-36) months.

RESULTS

Inflammation and exophthalmos improved dramatically in all patients within months after starting TCZ. Mean Clinical Activity Score decreased from 4.80 ±  1.13 to 0.70 ± 0.82 points at 6 months (mean change: -4.10 ± 1.52; p < .0001). Proptosis improved from 23.2 ± 2.1 to 20.6 ± 2.0 mm at 6 months (mean change: -2.9 ± 1.4 mm; p < .0001). Diplopia resolved in 7 patients. Thyroid receptor antibodies decreased markedly during TCZ treatment. Baseline serum IL-6 levels did not predict clinical response. TCZ was well-tolerated. During follow-up, 3 patients were diagnosed with cancer (breast cancer in 2 and urothelial cancer in 1).

CONCLUSIONS

TCZ was rapidly effective and well-tolerated in our patients with GC-refractory GO. Four patients experienced mild/moderate adverse events as neutropenia, hyperlipidemia, and infections; nearly a third developed cancer during the follow-up. The increased incidence observed could be explained by the high prevalence of smokers, that are at higher risk for Graves' orbitopathy and solid malignancies as breast cancer. Thus, regular cancer screening could be proposed to this vulnerable population receiving high doses of immunosuppressants.

A systematic literature review informing the consensus statement on efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatment with interleukin-6 pathway inhibition with biological DMARDs in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases

Objectives

Informing an international task force updating the consensus statement on efficacy and safety of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) selectively targeting interleukin-6 (IL-6) pathway in the context of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases.

Methods

A systematic literature research of all publications on IL-6 axis inhibition with bDMARDs published between January 2012 and December 2020 was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL databases. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed in clinical trials including their long-term extensions and observational studies. Meeting abstracts from ACR, EULAR conferences and results on clinicaltrials.gov were taken into consideration.

Results

187 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Evidence for positive effect of IL-6 inhibition was available in various inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, giant cell arteritis, Takayasu arteritis, adult-onset Still’s disease, cytokine release syndrome due to chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy and systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease. Newcomers like satralizumab and anti-IL-6 ligand antibody siltuximab have expanded therapeutic approaches for Castleman’s disease and neuromyelitis optica, respectively. IL-6 inhibition did not provide therapeutic benefits in psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and certain connective tissue diseases. In COVID-19, tocilizumab (TCZ) has proven to be therapeutic in advanced disease. Safety outcomes did not differ from other bDMARDs, except higher risks of diverticulitis and lower gastrointestinal perforations. Inconsistent results were observed in several studies investigating the risk for infections when comparing TCZ to TNF-inhibitors.

Conclusion

IL-6 inhibition is effective for treatment of several inflammatory diseases with a safety profile that is widely comparable to other bDMARDs.

Primary central nervous system malignant lymphoma in a patient with rheumatoid arthritis receiving tocilizumab: illustrative case

BACKGROUND

Although the risk of developing malignant lymphoma is higher in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) than in the general population, primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) in patients with RA is extremely rare. In recent years, there has been concern that biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), widely administered to patients with RA, might increase the risk of cancer development. The authors report the first case of PCNSL in a patient with RA receiving the bDMARD tocilizumab.

OBSERVATIONS

A 70-year-old man who was diagnosed with RA in 2010 was treated with low-dose methotrexate (MTX) from 2010 to 2015. Tocilizumab was commenced in 2012. In 2018, he developed gait disturbances, and gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging showed multiple contrast-enhanced lesions in the basal ganglia and brain stem. Stereotactic brain biopsy led to the diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and finally PCNSL was diagnosed. He was treated with five courses of MTX 3.5 g/m2, and his disease has been in remission for 34 months.

LESSONS

Low-dose MTX and bDMARDs are associated with the concern of increased cancer risk in patients with RA. Because tocilizumab has been in use for a relatively short time, further accumulation of cases and careful follow-up are necessary.

[Management of inflammatory rheumatic diseases during and after malignancies]

The management of inflammatory rheumatic diseases in patients with a simultaneous or previous malignant disease is associated with complex questions. Difficulties and possible solutions in the interpretation of meaningful studies are presented. Recommendations in guidelines on this topic are discussed. National registries and health insurance databases were examined with respect to the risk of tumor recurrence under disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs; however, these analyses mainly refer to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and rituximab. Data on tumor incidence and, if available, risk of tumor recurrence are summarized for commonly used disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Finally, an attempt is made to formulate proposals for rheumatological treatment in patients with a history of malignancy.

Lessons learned from the preclinical discovery and development of sarilumab for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) pathogenesis is driven by a complex network of proinflammatory cytokines, among which interleukin-6 (IL-6) plays a key role in inducing and perpetuating chronic inflammation. Targeting the IL-6 pathway has shown to be an invaluable treatment strategy, as demonstrated by the results accrued in the last decade with the first IL-6 inhibitor, tocilizumab. More recently, a second monoclonal antibody blocking IL-6, sarilumab, has enriched our armamentarium by proving outstanding efficacy in RA treatment.

AREAS COVERED

After exploring the IL-6 pathway under physiological conditions and in the RA pathogenesis, in this review we discuss the pharmacologic properties of sarilumab and the clinical trials that constitute the sarilumab development program and have enabled its licensed application.

EXPERT OPINION

Results from clinical trials confirmed the efficacy and safety of sarilumab for the treatment of RA, similar to its precursor tocilizumab. Blocking IL-6 pathway results in comprehensive control of the disease, from both physician's and patient's perspective, and of RA comorbidities and extra-articular manifestations which are largely IL-6 driven. Finally, the proven efficacy of sarilumab as monotherapy arises the drug as a required therapeutic alternative considering the large proportion of patients intolerant or inadequate to receive conventional synthetic disease-modifying drugs (csDMARDs).

Risk of malignancy in rheumatoid arthritis patients initiating biologics: an historical propensity score matched cohort study within the French nationwide healthcare database

Objective

To compare the risk of malignancy between patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) initiating their first biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) and those continuing conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs).

Methods

Nine-year historical Propensity Score (PS) matched cohort study within the French national healthcare database (87% of the French population; ~57 million people), including adults RA without malignancy. Exposures started with the first use of any systemic treatment (csDMARDs and/or bDMARDs). Incident users of bDMARDs were matched on a dynamic PS to patients continuing csDMARDs. Their risk of malignancy was compared by Cox model.

Results

From 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2014, 83 706 patients with RA started their first systemic treatment (63 837 remained on csDMARDs and 19 869 initiated a bDMARD during follow-up). After dynamic PS matching, 19 727 bDMARD initiators were compared with 19 727 RA remaining on csDMARDs. They did not statistically differ in risk of overall malignancies (HR 0.99 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.14)), solid cancer (HR 0.95 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.11)), nor lymphoma (HR 1.35 (95% CI 0.72 to 2.53)). Results were similar when bDMARDs were given as monotherapy or in association with csDMARDs. Analyses restricted to patients starting TNF inhibitor as first bDMARD compared with matched RA remaining on csDMARDs, provided similar results (HR for overall malignancy 1.03 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.21)). Sensitivity analyses, varying carry-over periods (up to 5 years) to define risk periods, provided similar results.

Conclusions

In this historical cohort study within the French nationwide healthcare database, the risk of overall, solid or haematological malignancies did not significantly differ between patients with RA initiating bDMARD and those continuing csDMARDs.

Safety of baricitinib for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis over a median of 4.6 and up to 9.3 years of treatment: final results from long-term extension study and integrated database

OBJECTIVE

To report long-term safety from the completed extension trial of baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase inhibitor, in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Treatment-emergent adverse events are summarised from an integrated database (9 phase III/II/Ib and 1 long-term extension) of patients who received any baricitinib dose (All-bari-RA). Standardised incidence ratio (SIR) for malignancy (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC)) and standardised mortality ratio (SMR) were estimated. Additional analysis was done in a subset of patients who had ever taken 2 mg or 4 mg baricitinib.

RESULTS

3770 patients received baricitinib (14 744 patient-years of exposure (PYE)). All-bari-RA incidence rates (IRs) per 100 patient-years at risk were 2.6, 3.0 and 0.5 for serious infections, herpes zoster and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), respectively. In patients aged ≥50 with ≥1 cardiovascular risk factor, the IR for MACE was 0.77 (95% CI 0.56 to 1.04). The IR for malignancy (excluding NMSC) during the first 48 weeks was 0.6 and remained stable thereafter (IR 1.0). The SIR for malignancies excluding NMSC was 1.07 (95% CI 0.90 to 1.26) and the SMR was 0.74 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.92). All-bari-RA IRs for deep vein thrombosis (DVT)/pulmonary embolism (PE), DVT and PE were 0.5 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.61), 0.4 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.45) and 0.3 (95% CI 0.18 to 0.35), respectively. No clear dose differences were noted for exposure-adjusted IRs (per 100 PYE) for deaths, serious infections, DVT/PE and MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

In this integrated analysis including long-term data of baricitinib from 3770 patients (median 4.6 years, up to 9.3 years) with active RA, baricitinib maintained a similar safety profile to earlier analyses. No new safety signals were identified.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01185353, NCT00902486, NCT01469013, NCT01710358, NCT02265705, NCT01721044, NCT01721057, NCT01711359 and NCT01885078.

Merkel cell carcinoma presenting as a malignant pleural effusion post-COVID-19 hospitalization: A case report and literature review

Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare, highly aggressive neuroendocrine carcinoma of the skin, associated with immunosuppression, UV light exposure, and the Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCPyV). Cases of metastatic MCC diagnosed in body fluid cytology are extremely rare; only five cases have been reported previously in the English literature. We present a case of a 65-year-old male with acute respiratory failure and an enlarged right pleural effusion. He had two hospitalizations for COVID-19 pneumonia 2 months prior, for which he received steroid treatment and tocilizumab. Emergent thoracentesis was done, with pleural fluid sent for cytologic evaluation. Both the Papanicolaou stained ThinPrep slide and cell block demonstrated clusters of predominantly small to medium sized blue round cells with hyperchromatic nuclei, scant cytoplasm and fine chromatin, in a background of rare mesothelial cells, macrophages and numerous lymphocytes. Tumor cells were positive for CD56, chromogranin, synaptophysin, SAT2B, MCPyV, and CK20 in perinuclear dot like pattern, while negative for TTF-1 and CD45 immunostains. Ki67 proliferative index was approximately 40%. The patient had a history of MCC of the right ulnar forearm 4 years before the current presentation, which was unknown to us at the time of cytologic evaluation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the sixth case of metastatic MCC diagnosed by fluid cytology and the first reported in a patient receiving immunosuppressive treatment for COVID-19. Further reporting of such cases may increase awareness, especially when prior history is not readily available, such as in our case.

A Review of Safety Outcomes from Clinical Trials of Baricitinib in Rheumatology, Dermatology and COVID-19

Baricitinib is an oral, selective inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 that transiently and reversibly inhibits many proinflammatory cytokines. This mechanism is a key mediator in a number of chronic inflammatory diseases; accordingly, baricitinib has been studied and approved for the treatment of several rheumatological and dermatological disorders, as well as COVID-19. This narrative review summarises and discusses the safety profile of baricitinib across these diseases, with special focus on adverse events of special interest (AESI) for JAK inhibitors, using integrated safety data sets of clinical trial data, and puts findings into context with the underlying risk in the respective disease populations, using supporting literature. We show that rates of infection with baricitinib generally reflected the inherent risk of the disease populations being treated, with serious infections and herpes zoster being more frequent in rheumatic diseases than in dermatological disorders, and herpes simplex being reported particularly in atopic dermatitis. Similarly, rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), venous thromboembolism (VTE) and malignancies were generally within or below the ranges reported for the respective disease populations, thereby reflecting the underlying risk; these events were therefore more frequent in patients with rheumatic diseases than in those with dermatological disorders, the latter of whom generally had low absolute risk. AESI were usually more common in patients with risk factors specific for each event. When a population similar to that of ORAL Surveillance was considered, the incidence rate of MACE with baricitinib was numerically lower than that reported with tofacitinib and similar to that of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. No safety concerns were observed in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who received baricitinib for up to 14 days. Identifying the patterns and likelihoods of AEs that occur during treatment in large groups of patients with different diseases can help the physician and patient better contextualise the benefit-to-risk ratio for the individual patient.

Does tocilizumab have a role in dermatology? A review of clinical applications, its adverse side effects and practical considerations

Tocilizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody to the interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor which was first approved for use in refractory rheumatoid arthritis almost a decade ago. Since then, its use has expanded to a number of rheumatological and inflammatory conditions. In dermatology, off-label use of tocilizumab has been reported to be efficacious in morphoea, systemic sclerosis, psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, vitiligo, graft-versus-host disease, pyoderma gangrenosum, Behcet's disease, Schnitzler's syndrome, sarcoidosis, and cutaneous adverse reactions. That being said, the evidence demonstrating tocilizumab's efficacy in dermatology is predominantly low-level case-based evidence, and one must consider the potential for publication bias. In this review we will discuss the reported clinical applications of tocilizumab in dermatology, mechanisms of action, and the range of associated adverse effects (both cutaneous and non-cutaneous) that can occur. Additionally, we will discuss the role of tocilizumab in the management of COVID-19.

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.

Tocilizumab and its usage for skin diseases

The monoclonal anti-IL6 receptor antibody called Tocilizumab is widely used by rheumatologists for joint diseases. Its application in dermatology has mainly concerned scleroderma and Systemic Sclerosis in the last years. The most varied skin diseases treated with tocilizumab, such as psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, Behcet's Syndrome, Lupus, and the already mentioned scleroderma up to multi-organ syndromes with skin involvement will be discussed. At the same time, there have been several side reactions to the drug involving the skin forcing careful skin monitoring during treatment. Despite the evidence currently available in the appropriate literature, there is no formal recommendation for any of these diseases to use Tocilizumab for therapeutic purposes. The aim of this review was to collect all the main evidence on the use and involvement of the drug in dermatological practice in order to stimulate further research or hypothesize on possible therapeutic options.

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.

Rheumatologische medikamentöse Therapie bei Malignomanamnese

Rheumatologische Therapie bei Patienten mit Malignomanamnese ist mit komplexen Fragestellungen verbunden. Schwierigkeiten und Lösungsmöglichkeiten bei der Interpretation aussagekräftiger Studien werden dargestellt. Empfehlungen in Leitlinien zu diesem Thema werden diskutiert. Nationale Register und Versicherungsdatenbanken wurden mit der Frage nach Tumorrezidivrisiko unter Basistherapeutika untersucht ; diese Analysen beziehen sich aber v. a. auf TNF-Inhibitoren und Rituximab. Zu den gängigen Substanzen der Basistherapie werden Daten zur Tumorinzidenz und wenn vorhanden zum Tumorrezidivrisiko zusammengefasst. Abschließend wird der Versuch unternommen Vorschläge zur rheumatolgischen Therapie bei Malignomanamnese zu formulieren.

Risk of malignancy with non-TNFi biologic or tofacitinib therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: A meta-analysis of observational studies

OBJECTIVES

To assess the risk of developing cancer in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) exposed to non-TNF inhibitors (TNFi) biologics or tofacitinib therapy.

METHODS

Systematical search of PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library plus a hand search of conference proceedings were performed. Observational studies that reported cancer incidence in patients with RA treated with biologics or tofacitinib with active comparator of conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) or TNFi were eligible for inclusion. The pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated with fix-effects or random-effects model.

RESULTS

Of 2,819 identified articles, a total of 10 studies involving over 40,587 patients with more than 87,622 patient-years of exposure to non-TNF inhibitors (TNFi) biologics and 2,221 patients with more than 4,506 patient-years of exposure to tofacitinib were included. Pooled analysis showed there was no increased risk of developing cancer in general or specific cancer types in RA patients receiving treatment with rituximab (pooled RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.74-1.03), tocilizumab (pooled RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79-1.06), or tofacitinib, compared with those receiving csDMARDs or TNFi. But abatacept was associated with a slightly increased overall cancer risk (pooled RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.24) and non-melanoma skin cancer (pooled RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.09-1.45), relative to csDMARDs or TNFi in RA patients.

CONCLUSION

Among RA patients, a small statistically significant increase in developing cancer was observed for abatacept exposure, while no increased cancer risk for rituximab, tocilizumab or tofacitinib, in comparison with csDMARDs or TNFi.

Update on the Pathomechanism, Diagnosis, and Treatment Options for Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disease that involves multiple joints bilaterally. It is characterized by an inflammation of the tendon (tenosynovitis) resulting in both cartilage destruction and bone erosion. While until the 1990s RA frequently resulted in disability, inability to work, and increased mortality, newer treatment options have made RA a manageable disease. Here, great progress has been made in the development of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) which target inflammation and thereby prevent further joint damage. The available DMARDs are subdivided into (1) conventional synthetic DMARDs (methotrexate, hydrochloroquine, and sulfadiazine), (2) targeted synthetic DMARDs (pan-JAK- and JAK1/2-inhibitors), and (3) biologic DMARDs (tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors, TNF-receptor (R) inhibitors, IL-6 inhibitors, IL-6R inhibitors, B cell depleting antibodies, and inhibitors of co-stimulatory molecules). While DMARDs have repeatedly demonstrated the potential to greatly improve disease symptoms and prevent disease progression in RA patients, they are associated with considerable side-effects and high financial costs. This review summarizes our current understanding of the underlying pathomechanism, diagnosis of RA, as well as the mode of action, clinical benefits, and side-effects of the currently available DMARDs.

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

INTRODUCTION

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at an increased risk of developing malignancies, but it is unclear whether this increased risk is the result of disease pathobiology or immunosuppressant treatments for RA. This analysis evaluated the potential risk of malignancy in patients with RA treated with rituximab (MabThera®/Rituxan®) a CD20+ B-cell depleting agent manufactured by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

METHODS

Malignancy rates were obtained from the rituximab global company safety database for adverse event reporting and from the rituximab global clinical trial program for RA consisting of eight randomized clinical trials, two long-term open-label extensions, and one open-label prospective study. Global company safety database searches were performed using the standard Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) queries "Malignant tumors wide" and "Skin malignant tumors wide" up to April 30, 2017. Age- and sex-specific comparator values from the general population were obtained from the US National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.

RESULTS

For the 409,706 patients with RA in the rituximab global company safety database since first market approval in 2006, 1739 cumulative malignant events were reported, with an overall malignancy reporting rate of approximately 4.2 events per 1000 patients. No evidence of increased risk of malignancy, of any organ-specific type, was found following rituximab treatment. The rate of malignancies from rituximab-treated patients in RA clinical trials was 7.4 per 1000 patient-years. This is within the expected range, with no evidence for increased risk over time or with additional rituximab courses.

CONCLUSIONS

Analyses of the global postmarketing safety database and long-term clinical trial data showed no evidence of an increased risk of malignancy of any type following rituximab treatment in patients with RA.

FUNDING

F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Molecular mechanisms underlying rheumatoid arthritis and cancer development and treatment

Given recent advances in cancer immune therapy, specifically use of checkpoint inhibitors, understanding the link between autoimmunity and cancer is essential. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affects about 1% of the population, and early diagnosis is key to prevent joint damage. Management consists of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs that alter normal immunologic pathways, which could affect malignancy growth and survival. Prolonged immune dysregulation and the resulting inflammatory response associated with development of RA may also lead to increased cancer development risk. RA has long been associated with increased risk of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma [1] and further evidence supports relationship to lung cancer [2]. This review will address the mechanisms behind cancer development and progression in RA patients, biomarkers and assess cancer risk and early detection.

Abatacept in rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of cancer: a world observational post-marketing study

Objectives

We aimed to investigate whether abatacept used in patients for RA was associated with an increased risk of reporting overall cancer and specific cancers, including breast, lung, lymphoma, melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer when compared with other biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs).

Methods

We performed an observational study within VigiBase, the World Health Organization’s global database of individual case safety reports, from 2007 to 2017 to compare the cases of cancer reported in RA patients exposed to abatacept with those reported in RA patients exposed to other bDMARDs. We conducted disproportionality analyses allowing the estimation of reporting odds ratios (RORs) with 95% CIs of the exposure odds among spontaneous reporting of cancers to the exposure odds among other reported adverse effects.

Results

We identified 15 846 adverse effects reported in RA patients who received abatacept and 290 568 adverse effects reported in RA patients treated with other bDMARDs. Compared with other bDMARDs, the use of abatacept was not associated with an increased risk of reporting cancer overall [ROR 0.98 (95% CI 0.91, 1.05)]. Analyses by specific cancer sites showed a significantly increased ROR for melanoma [1.58 (95% CI 1.17, 2.08)], but not for other specific cancer sites.

Conclusion

Compared with other bDMARDs, exposure to abatacept in RA patients was only significantly associated with an increased risk of reporting melanoma. This increased risk is consistent with the properties of abatacept (CTLA-4 agonist) since it has an opposite action than ipilimumab, an antibody that blocks CTLA-4 and is approved for the treatment of malignant melanoma.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (http://clinicaltrials.gov), NCT03980639.

Comparative risk of malignancies and infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating abatacept versus other biologics: a multi-database real-world study

Background

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at an increased risk of developing certain cancers and infections compared with the general population. Biologic and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) are effective treatment options for RA, but limited evidence is available on the comparative risks among b/tsDMARDs. We assessed the risk of malignancies and infections in patients with RA who initiated abatacept versus other b/tsDMARDs in a real-world setting.

Methods

This retrospective, observational study used administrative data from three large US healthcare databases (MarketScan, PharMetrics, and Optum) to identify patients treated with abatacept or other b/tsDMARDs. In both groups, age-stratified incidence rates (IRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for total malignancy and hospitalized infections; propensity score matching and Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs for total malignancy, lung cancer, lymphoma, breast cancer, non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), hospitalized infections, opportunistic infections, and tuberculosis (TB), both within individual databases and in meta-analyses across the three databases.

Results

A rounded total of 19.2, 13.6, and 4.2 thousand patients initiating abatacept and 55.3, 40.8, and 13.8 thousand initiating other b/tsDMARDs were identified in the MarketScan, PharMetrics, and Optum databases, respectively. The IRs for total malignancy and hospitalized infections were similar between the two groups in each age stratum. In meta-analyses, total malignancy risk (HR [95% CI] 1.09 [1.02–1.16]) of abatacept versus other b/tsDMARDs was slightly but statistically significantly increased; small, but not statistically significant, increases were seen for lung cancer (1.10 [0.62–1.96]), lymphoma (1.27 [0.94–1.72]), breast cancer (1.15 [0.92–1.45]), and NMSC (1.10 [0.93–1.30]). No significant increase in hospitalized infections (0.96 [0.84–1.09]) or opportunistic infections (1.06 [0.96–1.17]) was seen. For TB, low event counts precluded meta-analysis.

Conclusions

In this real-world multi-database study, the risks for specific cancers and infections did not differ significantly between patients in the abatacept and other b/tsDMARDs groups. The slight increase in total malignancy risk associated with abatacept needs further investigation. These results are consistent with the established safety profile of abatacept.