Safety and efficacy of switching from adalimumab to sarilumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the ongoing MONARCH open-label extension

Long-term safety and efficacy of sarilumab with or without background csDMARDs in rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of sarilumab with/without conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs in RA.

METHODS

The analyses evaluated two open-label extensions (OLEs): EXTEND and MONARCH OLE, which included patients from six randomized trials. Patients received sarilumab 200 mg once every 2 weeks (q2w) for at least 264 weeks up to 516 weeks (EXTEND: Sarilumab Monotherapy and Sarilumab + csDMARD groups) or for 276 weeks (MONARCH OLE: Continuation and Switch groups). Primary endpoints included safety, immunogenicity and changes in laboratory parameters. Secondary endpoints included clinical signs and symptoms along with health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) questionnaires.

RESULTS

The Sarilumab Monotherapy (n = 111), Continuation (n = 165) and Switch (n = 155) groups received sarilumab monotherapy, while the Sarilumab + csDMARD group (n = 1910) received sarilumab in combination with csDMARDs. Incidence of one or more treatment-emergent adverse events was 126 (Sarilumab Monotherapy group), 169 (Sarilumab + csDMARD group), 159 (Continuation group) and 159 (Switch group) events/100 patient-years. Neutropenia was the most common adverse event. Neutropenia was not associated with an increased incidence of infections. Most neutropenia cases normalized on-treatment. Adverse events of special interests, such as malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolism and gastrointestinal perforations, were rare. Immunogenicity was low and not associated with hypersensitivity reactions or discontinuations due to lack or loss of efficacy. Improvements in clinical signs and symptoms and HRQOL, observed during the initial blinded trials, were maintained throughout the OLE assessment period.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term sarilumab treatment with/without csDMARDs in patients with RA revealed no new safety findings. Efficacy and HRQOL were maintained or further increased over the open-label assessment period.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EXTEND, ClinicalTrials.gov, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01146652, NCT01146652; MONARCH OLE, ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02332590, NCT02332590.

Improvement or Worsening of Disease Activity After Switch to Sarilumab in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis With a Partial Response to Adalimumab

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of switching from adalimumab to sarilumab monotherapy in partial responders with rheumatoid arthritis from the MONARCH randomized trial and its open-label extension (OLE).

METHODS

Partial response was defined as improvement in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) of 12 or 6 units (baseline score: >22 or >10 and ≤22, respectively). Proportions of adalimumab partial responders with meaningful worsening or improvement at OLE weeks 12 and 24 were evaluated using 2 CDAI thresholds (≥6 and ≥12 points), 28-joint Disease Activity Score using erythrocyte sedimentation rate (≥0.6 and ≥1.2 points), Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (≥0.22 and ≥0.30 points), Simple Disease Activity Index (≥7 and ≥13 points), physician and patient global assessments (≥10 and ≥20), and 28-joint swollen and tender joint counts (≥1 and ≥2 joints). Outcomes were analyzed using mixed-effect models with repeated measures for observed cases. The p values were produced using Wilcoxon tests.

RESULTS

Of 369 enrolled patients, 320 (87%) entered the OLE and 155 switched from adalimumab to sarilumab; 59% (91/155) were partial responders. At week 24, 4%-17% and 2%-12% of partial responders experienced a worsening using the lower and higher thresholds, respectively, whereas 47%-78% and 27%-66% experienced improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Partial responders to adalimumab who switched to sarilumab had a low likelihood of experiencing meaningful worsening, with most patients showing meaningful improvement or no change in disease activity. This may help alleviate patients' fears of worsening when considering switching to a treatment with a different mechanism of action.

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.

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).

Tailored first-line biologic and targeted synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: 2021 updated ITABIO statements

INTRODUCTION

In 2015, the Italian board for the TAilored BIOlogic therapy (ITABIO) proposed evidence-based decisional statements for first-line tailored biologic therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Taking into account the new licensed drugs, the aim of the present review was to update the previous statements.

AREAS COVERED

A narrative review of the most recent evidence on the efficacy and safety of old and newly licensed drugs for the treatment of articular and extra-articular RA was performed. In addition, host-related variables potentially driving the therapy choice, such as the infection risk, the cardiovascular risk, the risk of deep vein thrombosis, thromboembolism, pregnancy, and obesity were analyzed. Consequently, several statements for personalized therapy were formulated, thus providing a decisional algorithm useful for proper personalized therapy of RA patients in clinical practice.

EXPERT OPINION

Several clinical variables related to specific drug and host characteristics may drive the choice toward anti-TNF and non-anti-TNF biologics, or anti-JAKs, thus allowing to personalize the therapy. Consequently, the right therapy for the right patient would ensure a successful therapeutic intervention.

A double-blind, double-dummy, randomized controlled, multicenter trial of 99Tc-methylene diphosphonate in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis

Background:

Clinical observational studies revealed that ⁹⁹Tc-methylene diphosphonate (⁹⁹Tc-MDP) could reduce joint pain and swollenness in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy study aimed to evaluate the effects of ⁹⁹Tc-MDP plus methotrexate (MTX) vs. MTX alone or ⁹⁹Tc-MDP alone on disease activity and structural damage in MTX-naïve Chinese patients with moderate to severe RA.

Methods:

Eligible patients with moderate to severely active RA were randomized to receive ⁹⁹Tc-MDP plus MTX (n = 59) vs. MTX (n = 59) alone or ⁹⁹Tc-MDP (n = 59) alone for 48 weeks from six study sites across four provinces in China. The primary outcomes were the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement (ACR20) response rates at week 24 and changes in modified total Sharp score at week 48.

Results:

At week 24, the proportion of participants achieving ACR20 was significantly higher in the MTX + ⁹⁹Tc-MDP combination group (69.5%) than that in the MTX group (50.8%) or ⁹⁹Tc-MDP group (47.5%) (P = 0.03 for MTX + ⁹⁹Tc-MDP vs. MTX, and MTX + ⁹⁹Tc-MDP vs.⁹⁹Tc-MDP, respectively). The participants in the MTX + ⁹⁹Tc-MDP group and the ⁹⁹Tc-MDP group had significantly less important radiographic progression than the participants in the MTX group over the 48 weeks (MTX + ⁹⁹Tc-MDP vs. MTX: P = 0.03, ⁹⁹Tc-MDP vs. MTX: P = 0.03, respectively). There was no significant difference in terms of adverse events (AEs) among the groups. No serious AEs were observed.

Conclusions:

This study demonstrated that the combination of ⁹⁹Tc-MDP with MTX inhibited structural damage and improved disease activity in RA patients compared with MTX and ⁹⁹Tc-MDP monotherapies, without increasing the rate of AEs. Additional clinical studies of ⁹⁹Tc-MDP therapy in patients with RA are warranted.

Trial Registration:

Chictr.org, ChiCTR-IPR-14005684; http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=10088.

Effect of interleukin-6, -17, -21, -22, and -23 and STAT3 on signal transduction pathways and their inhibition in autoimmune arthritis

Rheumatic diseases are complex autoimmune diseases which include among others rheumatoid arthritis (RA), juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). These diseases are characterized by prolonged and increased secretion of inflammatory factors, eventually leading to inflammation. This is often accompanied by persistent pain and stiffness in the joint and finally bone destruction and osteoporosis. These diseases can occur at any age, regardless of gender or origin. Autoimmune arthritis is admittedly associated with long-term treatment, and discontinuation of medication is associated with unavoidable relapse. Therefore, it is important to detect the disease at an early stage and apply appropriate preventative measures. During inflammation, pro-inflammatory factors such as interleukins (IL)-6, -17, -21, -22, and -23 are secreted, while anti-inflammatory factors including IL-10 are downregulated. Research conducted over the past several years has focused on inhibiting inflammatory pathways and activating anti-inflammatory factors to improve the quality of life of people with rheumatic diseases. The aim of this paper is to review current knowledge on stimulatory and inhibitory pathways involving the signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3). STAT3 has been shown to be one of the crucial factors involved in inflammation and is directly linked with other pro-inflammatory factors and thus is a target of current research on rheumatoid diseases.

Interleukin-6 in Rheumatoid Arthritis

The role of interleukin (IL)-6 in health and disease has been under a lot of scrutiny in recent years, particularly during the recent COVID-19 pandemic. The inflammatory pathways in which IL-6 is involved are also partly responsible of the development and progression of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), opening interesting perspectives in terms of therapy. Anti-IL-6 drugs are being used with variable degrees of success in other diseases and are being tested in RA. Results have been encouraging, particularly when anti-IL-6 has been used with other drugs, such as metothrexate (MTX). In this review we discuss the main immunologic aspects that make anti-IL-6 a good candidate in RA, but despite the main therapeutic options available to target IL-6, no gold standard treatment has been established so far.