Inclusion of fibrinoid necrosis increases the accuracy of synovial tissue assessment in predicting response to methotrexate: analysis of the UCLouvain Brussels ERA Cohort

OBJECTIVE

Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) often exhibits suboptimal treatment response despite early diagnosis and treatment. This study aimed to analyze Early Rheumatoid Arthritis (ERA) synovial biopsies through histology and immunohistochemistry (IHC) to identify predictive factors for treatment response to Methotrexate (MTX).

METHODS

140 ERA patients from the UCLouvain Arthritis Cohort underwent synovial biopsy and were monitored after initiating Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug (DMARD) therapy. Histological features [Synovial Hyperplasia, Fibrinoid Necrosis (FN), Hypervascularization and Inflammatory Infiltrate] and IHC (CD3, CD20, CD138, CD68) were each semi-quantitatively assessed on a 0-3 scale with 7 levels.

RESULTS

A strong association was observed between synovial CD68 and Fibrinoid Necrosis scores [r = 0.44 (0.27 - 0.56); p < 0.0001]. CD68 correlated with C-Reactive Protein (CRP), DAS28, SDAI and CDAI. Fibrinoid Necrosis score correlated with CRP and DAS28. Patients were then categorized as CD68NecrosisHIGH (CD68 + Necrosis ≥ 3) and CD68NecrosisLOW (CD68 + Necrosis < 3). CD68NecrosisHIGH exhibited higher pre-treatment disease activity [5.48 (1.6) versus 4.8 (1.7); p = 0.03] and a greater fall in DAS28 [1.99 (2.06) versus 1.1 (2.27), p = 0.03], SDAI [21.45 (IQR 23.3) versus 11.65 (IQR 17.5); p = 0.003] and CDAI [16 [14.9] versus 10.5 (20.1), p = 0.04]. CD68NecrosisHIGH patients had a higher EULAR Moderate/Good Response rate. CD68Necrosis score was incorporated into a probability matrix model together with clinical features (SJC44 and DAS28) to predict achieving a Moderate/Good EULAR Response Criteria at 3 months with a good performance (AUC 0.724).

CONCLUSION

FN and CD68 + in ERA synovial biopsies identify patients with higher disease activity and predict a better treatment response at three months. A model including synovial CD68 and fibrinoid necrosis with baseline clinical features predicts EULAR response at 3 months.

Biomarkers of Cardiovascular Risk in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results From the TARGET Trial

Cardiovascular disease remains an important comorbidity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but traditional models do not accurately predict cardiovascular risk in patients with RA. The addition of biomarkers could improve prediction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The TARGET (Treatments Against RA and Effect on FDG PET/CT) trial assessed whether different treatment strategies in RA differentially impact cardiovascular risk as measured by the change in arterial inflammation on arterial target to background ratio on fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography scans conducted 24 weeks apart. A group of 24 candidate biomarkers supported by prior literature was assessed at baseline and 24 weeks later. Longitudinal analyses examined the association between baseline biomarker values, measured in plasma EDTA, and the change in arterial inflammation target to background ratio. Model fit was assessed for the candidate biomarkers only, clinical variables only, and models combining both. One hundred nine patients with median (interquartile range) age 58 years (53-65 years), RA duration 1.4 years (0.5-6.6 years), and 82% women had biomarkers assessed at baseline and follow-up. Because the main trial analyses demonstrated significant target to background ratio decreases with both treatment strategies but no difference across treatment groups, we analyzed all patients together. Baseline values of serum amyloid A, C-reactive protein, soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor 1, adiponectin, YKL-40, and osteoprotegerin were associated with significant change in target to background ratio. When selected candidate biomarkers were added to the clinical variables, the adjusted R2 improved from 0.20 to 0.33 (likelihood ratio P=0.0005).

CONCLUSIONS

A candidate biomarker approach identified several promising biomarkers that associate with baseline and treatment-associated changes in arterial inflammation in patients with RA. These will now be tested in an external validation cohort.

Osteoclast microRNA Profiling in Rheumatoid Arthritis to Capture the Erosive Factor

In rheumatoid arthritis (RA), only a subset of patients develop irreversible bone destruction. Our aim was to identify a microRNA (miR)-based osteoclast-related signature predictive of erosiveness in RA. Seventy-six adults with erosive (E) or nonerosive (NE) seropositive RA and 43 sex- and age-matched healthy controls were recruited. Twenty-five miRs from peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC)-derived osteoclasts selected from RNA-Seq (discovery cohort) were assessed by qPCR (replication cohort), as were 33 target genes (direct targets or associated with regulated pathways). The top five miRs found differentially expressed in RA osteoclasts were either decreased (hsa-miR-34a-3p, 365b-3p, 374a-3p, and 511-3p [E versus NE]) or increased (hsa-miR-193b-3p [E versus controls]). In vitro, inhibition of miR-34a-3p had an impact on osteoclast bone resorption. An integrative network analysis of miRs and their targets highlighted correlations between mRNA and miR expression, both negative (CD38, CD80, SIRT1) and positive (MITF), and differential gene expression between NE versus E (GXYLT1, MITF) or versus controls (CD38, KLF4). Machine-learning models were used to evaluate the value of miRs and target genes, in combination with clinical data, to predict erosion. One model, including a set of miRs (predominantly 365b-3p) combined with rheumatoid factor titer, provided 70% accuracy (area under the curve [AUC] 0.66). Adding genes directly targeted or belonging to related pathways improved the predictive power of the model for the erosive phenotype (78% accuracy, AUC 0.85). This proof-of-concept study indicates that identification of RA subjects at risk of erosions may be improved by studying miR expression in PBMC-derived osteoclasts, suggesting novel approaches toward personalized treatment. © 2023 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Biomarkers in the era of targeted therapy in giant cell arteritis and polymyalgia rheumatica: is it possible to replace acute-phase reactants?

Research into giant cell arteritis (GCA) and polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) has become more important in the last few decades. Physicians are facing several challenges in managing the diagnosis, treatment, and relapses of GCA and PMR patients. The search for biomarkers could provide elements to guide a physician's decision. In this review, we aim to summarize the scientific publications about biomarkers in GCA and PMR in the past decade. The first point raised by this review is the number of clinical situations in which biomarkers could be useful: differential diagnosis of either GCA or PMR, diagnosis of underlying vasculitis in PMR, prediction of relapse or complications, disease activity monitoring, choice, and modification of treatments. The second point raised by this review is the large number of biomarkers studied, from common markers like C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, or elements of blood count to inflammatory cytokines, growth factors, or immune cell subpopulations. Finally, this review underlines the heterogeneity between the studies and proposes points to consider in studies evaluating biomarkers in general and particularly in the case of GCA and PMR.

Biomarkers for the diagnosis and treatment of rheumatoid arthritis - a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disease, symmetrically affecting the small joints. Biomarkers are tools that can be used in the diagnosis and monitoring of RA.

AIM

To systematically explore the role of the biomarkers: C-reactive protein (CRP), rheumatoid factor (RF), anti-cyclic citrullinated protein (Anti-CCP), 14-3-3η protein, and the multi-biomarker disease activity (MBDA) score for the diagnosis and treatment of RA.

METHODS

A systematic review of the English literature using four different databases was carried out.

RESULTS

CRP >7.1 mg/L predicted poor conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) outcome in RA. Anti-CCP, CRP ≥0.3 mg/dL, and RF predicted bone erosion and cartilage destruction. Combination of high 14-3-3η protein with RF and CRP improved the prediction of rapid erosion progression (REP). Anti-CCP was not associated with disease activity but was associated with increased radiographic damage (r = 0.46, p = 0.048). RF was not associated with joint damage but correlated with ultrasound-detected bone erosion. The 14-3-3η protein significantly correlated with inflammation, bone rremodeling, and osteoporosis in RA patients (p < 0.05). In addition, the 14-3-3η protein positively correlated with RA duration (p = 0.003), disease aactivity, and positive RF (p = 0.025) and it distinguished early from established RA. Early MBDA scores correlated with later response in disease activity after 6 and 12 weeks of treatment (p < 0.05). The MBDA score was able to differentiate between small differences in disease activity, predicted remission over 1-year pperiod, and was a strong predictor of radiographic progression of RA.

CONCLUSION

The investigated biomarkers are helpful tools in clinical practice for diagnosis, monitoring of treatment, and predicting prognosis in RA patients. However, further research is still required to investigate novel biomarkers for the pre-treatment selection of potentially responsive patients before starting therapy for a precision medicine in this area.

Benefit of Filgotinib, a JAK1 Preferential Inhibitor, in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients with Previous Rapid Radiographic Progression: Post Hoc Analysis of Two Trials

INTRODUCTION

We conducted a post hoc analysis of efficacy and safety of filgotinib stratified by estimated radiographic progression rate before baseline (BL) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX; FINCH 1; NCT02889796) or were naïve to it (FINCH 3; NCT02886728).

METHODS

Radiographic progression rate was BL-Modified Total Sharp Score (mTSS) divided by RA duration (BL mTSS/year); estimated rapid radiographic progression (e-RRP) was BL change in mTSS/year ≥ 5; and estimated nonrapid radiographic progression (e-NRRP) was BL mTSS/year < 5. Efficacy and safety were compared between subgroups. All p-values are nominal.

RESULTS

In FINCH 1 and FINCH 3, 558/1755 (31.8%) and 787/1249 (63.0%) patients, respectively, had BL e-RRP. BL characteristics were generally similar between subgroups within each trial. At week (W) 24, in FINCH 1, proportions achieving a Disease Activity Score 28 for rheumatoid arthritis with C-reactive protein  < 2.6 were significantly greater with filgotinib 200 (FIL200) and 100 mg (FIL100) versus placebo among e-RRP and e-NRRP subgroups. In each study, proportions of FIL-treated patients achieving Clinical Disease Activity Index ≤ 2.8 and Simple Disease Activity Index ≤ 3.3 were similar between subgroups. In FINCH 3, disease activity measures were at least numerically improved among patients receiving FIL versus MTX monotherapy. At W24, mTSS changes from BL (CFB) were greater among patients with e-RRP in FINCH 1 and FINCH 3 versus e-NRRP (0.81 versus 0.19, p = 0.001; 0.67 versus 0.25, p = 0.31, respectively). At W52, in FINCH 1, mTSS CFBs were smaller among e-RRP patients treated with FIL200 (0.40; p < 0.001) and FIL100 (0.77; p = 0.024) versus adalimumab (ADA; 1.46). In FINCH 3 at W52, mTSS CFBs were significantly smaller with FIL200 versus MTX among e-RRP patients. Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were comparable between subgroups and across treatment arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with previous e-RRP who received standard care tended to progress radiographically. FIL200 demonstrated persistent, consistent benefit for disease activity control among e-RRP and e-NRRP subgroups, and AE profiles were similar between subgroups. Although filgotinib efficacy was somewhat reduced among patients with e-RRP, filgotinib treatment slowed radiographic progression in both subgroups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02889796, NCT02886728.

Inflammatory markers in rheumatic diseases

Immune-mediated rheumatic diseases (IMRDs) are a broad group of pathological conditions based on impaired immunological tolerance to one’s own tissues leading to inflammation and irreversible organ damage. Laboratory diagnosis of IMRDs includes a wide range of biomarkers (autoantibodies, acute phase proteins, cytokines, markers of endothelial damage, components of the complement system, immunoglobulins, cryoglobulins, lymphocyte subpopulations, indicators of bone metabolism, apoptosis markers, genetic markers, etc). One of the leading aspects of laboratory diagnosis of IMRDs is the study of the level of inflammation markers in the blood (erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein (CRP), serum amyloid protein (CAA), ferritin, procalcitonin, apolipoprotein AI, calprotectin, etc). The analysis of inflammation markers makes it possible to assess the disease activity, the nature of the progression and the prognosis of the outcomes of a chronic inflammatory process, as well as the effectiveness of the therapy. The review presents the latest data on the role of the most frequently studied inflammatory markers such as CRP, CAA and ferritin.

Trajectory clusters of radiographic progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: associations with clinical variables

OBJECTIVES

Identification of trajectories of radiographic damage in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by clustering patients according to the shape of their curve of Sharp-van der Heijde scores (SHSs) over time. Developing models to predict their progression cluster from baseline characteristics.

METHODS

Patient-level data over a 2-year period from five large randomised controlled trials on tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in RA were used. SHSs were clustered in a shape-respecting manner to identify distinct clusters of radiographic progression. Characteristics of patients within different progression clusters were compared at baseline and over time. Logistic regression models were developed to predict trajectory of radiographic progression using information at baseline.

RESULTS

In total, 1887 patients with 7738 X-rays were used for cluster analyses. We identified four distinct clusters with characteristic shapes of radiographic progression: one with a stable SHS over the whole 2-year period (C0/lowChange; 86%); one with relentless progression (C1/rise; 5.8%); one with decreasing SHS (C2/improvement; 6.9%); one going up and down (C3/bothWays; 1.4%) of the SHS. Robustness of clusters were confirmed using different clustering methods. Regression models identified disease duration, baseline C-reactive protein (CRP) and SHS and treatment status as predictors for cluster assignment.

CONCLUSIONS

We were able to identify and partly characterise four different clusters of radiographic progression over time in patients with RA, most remarkably one with relentless progression and another one with amelioration of joint damage over time, suggesting the existence of distinct patterns of joint damage accrual in RA.

Filgotinib in combination with methotrexate or as monotherapy versus methotrexate monotherapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis and limited or no prior exposure to methotrexate: the phase 3, randomised controlled FINCH 3 trial

OBJECTIVES

To investigate efficacy and safety of the Janus kinase-1 inhibitor filgotinib in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with limited or no prior methotrexate (MTX) exposure.

METHODS

This 52-week, phase 3, multicentre, double-blind clinical trial (NCT02886728) evaluated once-daily oral filgotinib in 1252 patients with RA randomised 2:1:1:2 to filgotinib 200 mg with MTX (FIL200 +MTX), filgotinib 100 mg with MTX (FIL100 +MTX), filgotinib 200 mg monotherapy (FIL200), or MTX. The primary endpoint was proportion achieving 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) at week 24.

RESULTS

The primary endpoint was achieved by 81% of patients receiving FIL200+ MTX versus 71% receiving MTX (p<0.001). A significantly greater proportion treated with FIL100+ MTX compared with MTX achieved an ACR20 response (80%, p=0.017) at week 24. Significant improvement in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index was seen at week 24; least-squares mean change from baseline was -1.0 and -0.94 with FIL200+MTX and FIL100+MTX, respectively, versus -0.81 with MTX (p<0.001, p=0.008, respectively). Significantly higher proportions receiving FIL200+MTX (54%) and FIL100+MTX (43%) achieved DAS28(CRP) <2.6 versus MTX (29%) (p<0.001 for both) at week 24. Hierarchical testing stopped for comparison of ACR20 for FIL200 monotherapy (78%) versus MTX (71%) at week 24 (p=0.058). Adverse event rates through week 52 were comparable between all treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

FIL200+MTX and FIL100+MTX both significantly improved signs and symptoms and physical function in patients with active RA and limited or no prior MTX exposure; FIL200 monotherapy did not have a superior ACR20 response rate versus MTX. Filgotinib was well tolerated, with acceptable safety compared with MTX.

Assessing the risk of rapid radiographic progression in Hungarian rheumatoid arthritis patients

Background

The outcome of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) should be determined early. Rapid radiological progression (RRP) is > or = 5 units increase according to the van der Heijde-Sharp score within a year. The risk of RRP can be estimated by a matrix model using non-radiographic indicators, such as C-reactive protein (CRP), rheumatoid factor (RF) and swollen joint count (SJC).

Patients and methods

A non-interventional, cross-sectional, retrospective study was conducted in eleven Hungarian arthritis centres. We assessed RRP risk in biologic-naïve RA patients with the prevalence of high RRP risk as primary endpoint. RRP was calculated according to this matrix model. As a secondary endpoint, we compared RRP in methotrexate (MTX) responders vs non-responders.

Results

We analyzed data from 1356 patients. Mean CRP was 17.7 mg/l, RF was 139.3 IU/ml, mean 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28) was 5.00 and mean SJC was 6.56. Altogether 18.2% of patients had high risk (≥40%) of RRP. RA patients with high RRP risk of RRP (n = 247) had significantly lower age compared to those with RRP < 40% (n = 1109). MTX non-response (OR: 16.84), male gender (OR: 1.67), erosions at baseline (OR: 1.50) and ACPA seropositivity (OR: 2.18) were independent predictors of high-risk RRP. Male gender (OR: 5.20), ACPA seropositivity (OR: 4.67) and erosions (OR: 7.98) were independent predictors of high RRP risk in MTX responders.

Conclusions

In this Hungarian study, high RRP risk occurred in 18% of RA patients. These patients differ from others in various parameters. RRP was associated with non-response to MTX.

Precision medicine and management of rheumatoid arthritis

Precision medicine (PM) is a very commonly used term that implies a highly individualized and tailored approach to patient management. There are, however, many layers of precision, as for example taking an appropriate patient history, or performing additional lab or imaging tests are already helping to better tailor treatments to the right patient. All this adds to the narrower definition of PM, which implies using the unique molecular characteristics of a patient for management decisions. Big data has become an essential part of PM, including as much information as possible to improve precision of disease management, although integration of multi-source data continues to be a challenge in practical application. In research big data can identify new (sub-)phenotypes in unsupervised analyses, which ultimately advance precision by allowing new targeted therapeutic approaches. We will discuss the current status of PM in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the management areas of diagnosis, prognosis, selection of therapy, and decision to reduce therapy. PM markers for diagnosis of RA are usually markers of RA classification rather than diagnosis, and subtypes of RA are potentially underrecognized. Prognostic precision is well established for RA, including markers of disease activity or structure, as well as autoantibodies and genetics. The choice of the right compound in a patient identified to have a poor prognosis, however, remains widely arbitrary. Finally and most recently, the most reliable markers for a safe withdrawal of therapy continue to be lower levels of disease activity and longer presence of remission.