Biologics and risk of tuberculosis in autoimmune rheumatic diseases: A real-world clinical experience from India

Expert views on screening for tuberculosis infection in patients commencing treatment with a biologic agent

OBJECTIVE

Many biologic agents cause some degree of immunosuppression, which can increase the risk of reactivation of tuberculosis infection (TBI). This risk is variable between individual biologics. We aimed to assess current (and recommended) clinical practice of TBI screening and treatment among patients initiating treatment with biologic agents.

METHODS

An online questionnaire was distributed via email to members of the Global Tuberculosis Network and associated professional organisations to seek insights into the screening for and treatment of TBI in patients treated with biologics.

RESULTS

A total of 163 respondents in 27 countries answered at least one question. For all biologics described in the questionnaire, respondents advised increasing screening relative to current practice. Observed and supported TBI screening rates in patients treated with TNF-a inhibitors were high, especially for older TNF-a inhibitors. Most participants supported TBI screening in patients treated with B- or T-cell inhibitors but not in those treated with interleukin inhibitors. Guideline awareness was higher for TNF-a inhibitors than for other biologic classes (79% vs. 34%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although respondents stated that TBI screening rates are lower than what they consider ideal, there was a tendency to recommend TBI screening in patients treated with biologics not known to be associated with an increased risk of TBI. As a result, there is a potential risk of over-screening and over-treatment of TBI, potentially causing harm, in patients treated with biologics other than TNF-a inhibitors. There is a need to research the risk of TBI associated with biologics and for guidelines to address the spectrum of TBI risk across all types of biologics.

Prevalence of Tuberculosis Infection among Various Risk Groups in India: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Treatment of tuberculosis (TB) infection (TBI) to prevent active TB disease is a key component of the National Strategic Plan to end TB in India, without which the strategies to end TB would be futile. There is a need to rapidly scale up access to effective shorter regimens for tuberculosis preventive treatment (TPT) to a wider set of risk groups. This applies for identifying high-risk groups for TPT expansion. Thus, our aim with this review is to determine the TBI prevalence in different risk groups in India. We searched databases like Embase, Medline, Scopus, and CINAHL for studies published between 2012 and 2023 to estimate TBI in different risk groups in India. The PRISMA guidelines were followed when reviewing the publications, and a predetermined search strategy was used to find relevant sources across various databases. Using MetaXL (MS excel) software, we pooled data based on a random-effects model, along with heterogeneity testing using Cochrane's Q and I2 statistic. A total of 68 studies were included from 10,521 records. TBI pooled prevalence was estimated using the IGRA data, while in the absence of IGRA data, TST data were utilized. The key findings revealed a total of 36% pooled TBI prevalence for all risk factors, 59% among smokers, 53% among diabetics and alcoholics, 48% among malnourished, 47% among contacts of TB patients, 44% among HIV, 36% among pregnant women, 35% among COVID-19 patients, 31% among healthcare workers, 18% among sarcoidosis patients, and 15% among rheumatoid arthritis patients in India. Our review depicted a high TBI burden among groups such as diabetes mellitus, smokers, malnourished, and alcoholics. WHO has yet to recommend for systematic screening and treatment for TBI among these groups for want of evidence which this study provides, highlighting the need to reprioritize the risk groups for tailored TPT strategies.

Prevalence of LTBI in patients with autoimmune diseases and accuracy of IGRA in predicting TB relapse

OBJECTIVES

The current study evaluated latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) positivity in a cohort of Indian subjects and the accuracy of IFN-gamma release assay (IGRA) in predicting tuberculosis (TB) reactivation.

METHODS

This cross-sectional, retrospective chart-based study considered patients diagnosed with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), especially those who received treatment with biologics or targeted synthetic (ts)DMARDs. The patients had undergone LTBI screening and IGRA test. The study excluded patients with inadequate information and those who had undergone test exclusively for diagnostic purpose. Statistical analyses were carried out for descriptive, demographic and clinical variables. Accuracy and error rate in predicting the absence of TB reactivation were calculated for IGRA test.

RESULTS

The study selected 943 patients who had undergone IGRA pre-screening prior to the initiation of biologics or tsDMARDs with a mean age of 42.93 ± 14.01 years and male-to-female ratio of 1:2.08. RA was the most common primary diagnosis (43.16%). The proportion of subjects who received single, double and triple or more DMARDs or immune suppressants were 54.35%, 33.33% and 7.69%, respectively. Among the selected subjects, 125 patients were LTBI positive and 816 were negative. All patients, except one who tested positive at baseline, received antitubercular prophylaxis. Accuracy of IGRA in predicting the absence of TB reactivation was 99.6%, with an error rate of 0.46.

CONCLUSION

LTBI screening is beneficial in AIRDs patients prior to the prescription of biologics or tsDMARDs. IGRA is ideal for identifying patients with increased likelihood of developing TB upon receiving biologics or tsDMARDs with reasonable accuracy.

The prevalence of tuberculosis infection in India: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background & objectives

The National Prevalence Survey of India (2019-2021) estimated 31 per cent tuberculosis infection (TBI) burden among individuals above 15 years of age. However, so far little is known about the TBI burden among the different risk groups in India. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis, aimed to estimate the prevalence of TBI in India based on geographies, sociodemographic profile, and risk groups.

Methods

To identify the prevalence of TBI in India, data sources such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Scopus were searched for articles reporting data between 2013-2022, irrespective of the language and study setting. TBI data were extracted from 77 publications and pooled prevalence was estimated from the 15 community-based cohort studies. Articles were reviewed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines and were sourced using a predefined search strategy from different databases.

Results

Out of 10,521 records, 77 studies (46 cross-sectional and 31 cohort studies) were included. The pooled TBI prevalence for India based on the community-based cohort studies was estimated as 41 per cent [95% confidence interval (CI) 29.5-52.6%] irrespective of the risk of acquiring it, while the estimation was 36 per cent (95% CI 28-45%) prevalence observed among the general population excluding high-risk groups. Regions with high active TB burden were found to have a high TBI prevalence such as Delhi and Tamil Nadu. An increasing trend of TBI was observed with increasing age in India.

Interpretation & conclusions

This review demonstrated a high prevalence of TBI in India. The burden of TBI was commensurate with active TB prevalence suggesting possible conversion of TBI to active TB. A high burden was recorded among people residing in the northern and southern regions of the country. Such local epidemiologic variation need to be considered to reprioritize and implement-tailored strategies for managing TBI in India.

2022 EULAR recommendations for screening and prophylaxis of chronic and opportunistic infections in adults with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases

Objectives

To develop EULAR recommendations for screening and prophylaxis of chronic and opportunistic infections in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD).

Methods

An international Task Force (TF) (22 members/15 countries) formulated recommendations, supported by systematic literature review findings. Level of evidence and grade of recommendation were assigned for each recommendation. Level of agreement was provided anonymously by each TF member.

Results

Four overarching principles (OAP) and eight recommendations were developed. The OAPs highlight the need for infections to be discussed with patients and with other medical specialties, in accordance with national regulations. In addition to biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for which screening for latent tuberculosis (TB) should be performed, screening could be considered also before conventional synthetic DMARDs, glucocorticoids and immunosuppressants. Interferon gamma release assay should be preferred over tuberculin skin test, where available. Hepatitis B (HBV) antiviral treatment should be guided by HBV status defined prior to starting antirheumatic drugs. All patients positive for hepatitis-C-RNA should be referred for antiviral treatment. Also, patients who are non-immune to varicella zoster virus should be informed about the availability of postexposure prophylaxis should they have contact with this pathogen. Prophylaxis againstPneumocystis jiroveciiseems to be beneficial in patients treated with daily doses >15–30 mg of prednisolone or equivalent for >2–4 weeks.

Conclusions

These recommendations provide guidance on the screening and prevention of chronic and opportunistic infections. Their adoption in clinical practice is recommended to standardise and optimise care to reduce the burden of opportunistic infections in people living with AIIRD.

Systematic literature review informing the 2022 EULAR recommendations for screening and prophylaxis of chronic and opportunistic infections in adults with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic literature review (SLR) on the screening and prophylaxis of opportunistic and chronic infections in autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD).

METHODS

SLR (inception-12/2021) based on the following search domains: (1) infectious agents, (2) AIIRD, (3) immunosuppressives/immunomodulators used in rheumatology, (4) screening terms and (5) prophylaxis terms. Articles were retrieved having the terms from (1) AND (2) AND (3) plus terms from (4) OR(5). Databases searched: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

studies on postoperative infections, paediatric AIIRD, COVID-19, vaccinations and non-Εnglish literature. Study quality was assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-randomised controlled trials (RCTs), RoB-Cochrane for RCTs, AMSTAR2 for SLRs.

RESULTS

From 5641 studies were retrieved, 568 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, with 194 articles finally included. For tuberculosis, tuberculin skin test (TST) is affected by treatment with glucocorticoids and conventional synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and its performance is inferior to interferon gamma release assay (IGRA). Agreement between TST and IGRA is moderate to low. For hepatitis B virus (HBV): risk of reactivation is increased in patients positive for hepatitis B surface antigen. Anti-HBcore positive patients are at low risk for reactivation but should be monitored periodically with liver function tests and/or HBV-viral load. Risk for Hepatitis C reactivation is existing but low in patients treated with biological DMARDs. For Pneumocystis jirovecii, prophylaxis treatment should be considered in patients treated with prednisolone ≥15-30 mg/day for >2-4 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Different screening and prophylaxis approaches are described in the literature, partly determined by individual patient and disease characteristics.

Central nervous system infections in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on central nervous system (CNS) infections in patients with SLE, in order to describe their clinical and microbiological characteristics, and outcomes. A systematic search of PubMed/Medline and Embase electronic databases was performed (March 2021) to identify all published studies on CNS infections and their characteristics in patients with SLE. A random-effects model was adopted and findings were reported with 95% CI. Overall, 6 studies involving 17 751 patients with SLE and 209 SLE cases with CNS infection were included in our meta-analysis. The frequency rate of CNS infections in patients with SLE was 0.012 (95% CI: 0.008 to 0.018). Meningitis was the most common clinical syndrome (93.5%, n=109/114, 95% CI: 82.6% to 97.8%) and Cryptococcus neoformans (35.9%, n=55, 95% CI: 27.2% to 45.7%) and Mycobacterium tuberculosis (27.1%, n=43, 95% CI: 14.6% to 44.8%) were the most common causative pathogens. Our patient-pool showed a mean SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) score of 7.9 (95% CI: 6.1 to 9.6), while 92.4% (n=72/76, 95% CI: 83.0% to 96.8%) of cases were on oral systemic corticosteroids, with a prednisone equivalent mean daily dose of 30.9 mg/day (95% CI: 18.0 to 43.7). Our meta-analysis revealed a mortality rate of 29.0% (95% CI: 15.0% to 48.6%). Clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion for cryptococcal and tuberculosis (TB) meningitis in patients with SLE with suspected CNS infection, particularly in those with higher SLEDAI and on higher doses of systemic corticosteroids. In conclusion, initiation of empiric antituberculous treatment for patients with SLE who are highly suspected to have CNS TB is warranted while awaiting the results of diagnostic tests. Antifungals might also be potentially useful empirically in patients with SLE who are suspected to have fungal CNS infections. However, with respect to side effects such as toxicity and high cost of antifungals, decision regarding early antifungal therapy should be guided by early and less time-consuming fungal diagnostic tests.

Ankylosing spondylitis and psoriatic arthritis: revisiting screening of latent tuberculosis infection and its follow-up during anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy in an endemic area

OBJECTIVES

To retrospectively evaluate the performance and distinctive pattern of latent tuberculosis (TB) infection (LTBI) screening and treatment in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) under anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy and determine the relevance of re-exposure and other risk factors for TB development.

METHODS

A total of 135 and 83 patients with AS and PsA, respectively, were evaluated for LTBI treatment before receiving anti-TNF drugs via the tuberculin skin test (TST), chest radiography, and TB exposure history assessment. All subjects were evaluated for TB infection at 3-month intervals.

RESULTS

The patients with AS were more often treated for LTBI than were those with PsA (42% versus 30%, p=0.043). The former also presented a higher frequency of TST positivity (93% versus 64%, p=0.002), although they had a lower frequency of exposure history (18% versus 52%, p=0.027) and previous TB (0.7% versus 6%, p=0.03). During follow-up [median, 5.8 years; interquartile range (1QR), 2.2-9.0 years], 11/218 (5%) patients developed active TB (AS, n=7; PsA, n=4). TB re-exposure was the main cause in seven patients (64%) after 12 months of therapy (median, 21.9 months; IQR, 14.2-42.8 months) and five LTBI-negative patients. TB was identified within the first year in four patients (36.3%) (median, 5.3 months; IQR, 1.2-8.8 months), two of whom were LTBI-positive. There was no difference in the TB-free survival according to the anti-TNF drug type/class; neither synthetic drug nor prednisone use was related to TB occurrence (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Known re-exposure is the most critical factor for incident TB cases in spondyloarthritis. There are also some distinct features in AS and PsA LTBI screening, considering the higher frequency of LTBI and TST positivities in patients with AS. Annual risk reassessment taking into consideration these peculiar features and including the TST should be recommended for patients in endemic countries.

Tuberculosis and targeted synthetic or biologic DMARDs, beyond tumor necrosis factor inhibitors

Patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD) have an increased risk for tuberculosis (TB). The use of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and glucocorticoids in these patients has been associated with an increased prevalence of latent TB reactivation. Over the last few years, several biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), other than TNFi (e.g. rituximab, abatacept, tocilizumab, secukinumab) and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) [e.g. apremilast, Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors] have been used for the treatment of patients with ARD. For many of these drugs, especially the newer ones like JAK inhibitors or antibodies against interleukin (IL)-23, most data stem from randomized clinical trials and few are available from real life clinical experience. We sought to review the current evidence for TB risk in patients with ARD treated with tsDMARDs or bDMARDs, other than TNFi. It seems that some of these drugs are associated with a lower TB risk, indirectly compared with TNFi treatment. In fact, it appears that rituximab, apremilast and inhibitors of IL-17 and IL-23 might be safer, while more data are needed for JAK inhibitors. As seen in TNFi, risk for TB is more pronounced in TB-endemic areas. Screening for latent TB must precede initiation of any tsDMARDs or bDMARDs. The growing use of non-TNFi agents has raised the need for more real-life studies that would compare the risk for TB between TNFi and other treatment modalities for ARD. Knowledge about the TB-safety profile of these drugs could help in the decision of drug choice in patients with confirmed latent TB infection or in TB endemic areas.

Therapeutic issues with, and long-term outcomes of, pulmonary mycobacterial tuberculosis treatment in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases

Background

Real-world data on treatment safety and outcome of pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) in patients with rheumatic diseases (RDs) are scarce. This study explored the therapeutic issues of standard first-line anti-tuberculosis (TB) medication in patients in whom PTB complicated autoimmune RDs.

Methods

Observational, retrospective study was conducted in an intermediate TB burden area, South Korea. We evaluated the safety profile of, and adherence to, standard first-line anti-TB medication in PTB patients with systemic RD and assessed the long-term treatment outcomes, up to 84 months after treatment completion.

Results

We included 37 patients suffering from PTB with RD (case group) and 191 without RD (control group). Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was the most common RD (24 PTB patients, 64.9%). The frequency of severe adverse drug reactions (ADRs) was significantly higher in the case group than in the control group (36.1% vs. 12.5%, P=0.003). Severe gastrointestinal problems were the most commonly observed ADRs, with a high frequency consistently noted in both groups. Changes in first-line anti-TB medication because of severe ADRs were significantly more frequent in the case group, compared with the control group (19.4% vs. 8.3%, P=0.046). No significant between-group difference was evident in terms of long-term unfavorable outcomes (including relapse and mortality) (5.7% cases vs. 1.2% controls, P=0.146).

Conclusions

Clinicians may encounter difficulties when treating PTB in patients with RD. Despite the favorable long-term outcomes of RD patients, the outcomes of individual patients such as those with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) should be interpreted with caution during post-therapy follow-up.

Special aspects of biologics treatment in psoriasis: management in pregnancy, lactation, surgery, renal impairment, hepatitis and tuberculosis

Background of the article: Biologics are modern immunomodulatory drugs, whose use in the treatment of psoriasis has led to remarkable results in psoriatic patients. The administration of these agents in special population groups, such as patients with chronic infections and renal impairment, as well as perioperative, pregnant or lactating patients, has not been thoroughly addressed, mostly because these patients are excluded from clinical studies. Materials and methods: This report is an updated systematic overview of the use of biologics in the above-mentioned types of patients and was conducted according to the PRISMA Guidelines for systematic reviews. Articles derived from the databases PubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS, published between 1999 and 2018, were analyzed for the study. Results: Research efforts as well as clinical reporting are necessary in order to provide more insight on the management of these therapeutic dilemmas. Conclusion: The aim of this review, other than providing a summarized update on the clinical knowledge on this special topic, is also to raise awareness for the need to conduct larger systematic studies in order to adequately evaluate the use of biologics in these special patient categories and therefore draw definite conclusions on their safety profile.