Efficacy of rituximab in non-paraneoplastic autoimmune retinopathy

Rituximab Monotherapy versus Rituximab and Bortezomib Combination Therapy for Treatment of Non-paraneoplastic Autoimmune Retinopathy

Purpose

To study whether rituximab and bortezomib combination therapy is more effective than rituximab monotherapy in the treatment of non-paraneoplastic autoimmune retinopathy (npAIR).

Methods

Retrospective case series involving six patients with npAIR, taking either rituximab and bortezomib combination therapy (three cases) or rituximab monotherapy (one case and two historical patients).

Results

Patients on both treatment regimens showed stability in most of the visual function parameters during the one year of follow-up. Combination therapy resulted in improvement of scotopic combined rod and cone a-wave and b-wave amplitudes in all eyes where they were available (four eyes); however, rituximab monotherapy resulted in only two eyes with stable scotopic combined rod and cone a-wave and b-wave amplitudes, while four eyes showed a decrease in both a- and b-wave amplitudes. The average improvement in b-wave amplitude (50.7% ± 29.4% [range, 25-90%]) was higher than the average improvement in a-wave amplitude (35.7% ± 9.74 [range, 25-63%]). No severe adverse effects were reported.

Conclusion

Rituximab and bortezomib combination therapy may not be more effective than rituximab monotherapy in npAIR patients for most of the visual function parameters; however, this combination therapy may be more effective in improving scotopic combined rod and cone a- and b-wave amplitudes. This may indicate the higher efficacy of combination therapy when there is involvement of the inner retina.

Rituximab for non-infectious Uveitis and Scleritis

Purpose

To provide a comprehensive review of rituximab use for the treatment of non-infectious uveitis and scleritis.

Methods

Review of literature through December 2020.

Results

Individual data was available for 229 patients with refractory non-infectious uveitis (n = 108) or scleritis (n = 121) who received treatment with rituximab (RTX). Rituximab was generally utilized as third-line or later treatment (uveitis: 67/90, 74.4%; scleritis: 90/96, 93.8%) at a mean of 33.5 months following the diagnosis of uveitis (range = 0 to 168.0 months; median = 24.0 months) and 39.4 months after diagnosis of scleritis (range = 1.0 to 168.0 months; median = 21.0 months). Patients with non-infectious uveitis and scleritis either received prior treatment with corticosteroids only (uveitis: 18/90, 20%; scleritis: 4/94, 4.3%), or with one (uveitis: 19/90, 21.1%; scleritis: 30/94, 31.9%), two (uveitis: 11/90, 12.2%; scleritis 27/94, 28.7%), or three or more (uveitis: 37/90, 41.1%; scleritis: 31/94, 33.0%) corticosteroid-sparing immunosuppressive agents with or without corticosteroids before initiation of RTX treatment. The rheumatologic protocol (two infusions of 1 gram of RTX separated by 14 days) was utilized most frequently (uveitis: 45/87, 51.7%; scleritis: 87/114, 76.3%), followed by the Foster protocol (eight weekly infusions of 375 mg/m² RTX; uveitis: 18/87, 20.7%; scleritis: 10/114, 8.8%), and the oncologic protocol (four weekly infusions of 375 mg/m² RTX; uveitis: 5/87, 5.7%; scleritis: 6/114, 5.3%). Various other off-label regimens were used infrequently (uveitis: 19/87, 21.8%; scleritis 11/114, 9.6%). Rituximab treatments resulted in a positive therapeutic response for the majority of patients with non-infectious uveitis (81/97, 83.5%). Commonly treated uveitic diagnoses included non-paraneoplastic autoimmune retinopathy (30/107, 28.0%), juvenile idiopathic arthritis (21/107, 19.6%), Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada disease (12/107, 11.2%), and Behçet disease (11/107, 10.3%). Cases of non-infectious scleritis were most commonly attributed to granulomatosis with polyangiitis (75/121, 62.0%) and rheumatoid arthritis (15/121, 12.4%), and showed an even greater rate of positive therapeutic response (112/120, 93.3%) following RTX treatment. No side effects were reported in 76.3% (74/97) of uveitis and 85.5% (71/83) scleritis cases. Of those cases associated with RTX-induced adverse events, the most common were infusion reactions of various severity (11/35, 31.4%).

Conclusions

Overall, RTX appeared to be both effective and well-tolerated as second or third-line therapy for patients with non-infectious uveitis and scleritis.

An update on autoimmune retinopathy

Autoimmune retinopathy (AIR) refers to a group of rare autoimmune retinal degenerative diseases presumably caused by cross-reactivity of serum autoantibodies against retinal antigens. The pathogenesis of AIR remains largely presumptive and there are a significant number of antiretinal antibodies that have been detected in association with AIR. The diagnosis of AIR is largely based on the demonstration of antiretinal antibodies in the serum along with suggestive clinical features and ancillary investigations. A high index of suspicion along with early diagnosis and treatment may play a critical role to lower the risk of irreversible immunological damage to the retinal cells in these patients. A multi-disciplinary approach for complete management and evaluation is helpful in such conditions. Various therapeutic options have been described for the treatment of AIR, though there is no consensus on standard treatment protocol.

Rituximab for autoimmune retinopathy: Results of a Phase I/II clinical trial

PURPOSE:

This prospective study evaluates whether rituximab is a safe and potentially effective treatment for nonparaneoplastic autoimmune retinopathy (npAIR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Five npAIR patients were enrolled in a Phase I/II, prospective, nonrandomized, open-label, single-center study. All patients received a cycle of 1000 mg intravenous rituximab at weeks 0 and 2, with a second cycle of rituximab 6 to 9 months later. Clinical evaluation was performed at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks after each rituximab cycle, and then every 3 months for a total duration of 18 months. The primary outcome for this study was treatment success based on visual field and full-field electroretinography at 6 months. The secondary outcomes included treatment success at months 12 and 18, drug-related adverse events, changes in visual symptoms, and changes in quality of life.

RESULTS:

Two patients met criteria for treatment success: one based solely on electroretinography and the other based solely on visual field area, but treatment success was not sustained. Clinical response over the course of the 18-month study showed disease stabilization in three patients and treatment failure in two patients. There were no severe drug-related adverse events.

CONCLUSION:

This is the first clinical trial prospectively evaluating the effect of rituximab in npAIR and, although rituximab was well tolerated, there was no clear-cut clinical improvement conferred by B cell depletion with rituximab.

Autoimmune retinopathy associated with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: a case report

Background

Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) is a plasma cell dyscrasia and precursor to multiple myeloma. It has known ocular manifestations, but has not previously been shown to have an association with autoimmune retinopathy.

Case presentation

A 57 year-old female presented with 1 year of progressive, bilateral, peripheral vision loss, photopsias, and nyctalopia. Her fundus examination and extensive ancillary testing were concerning for hereditary versus autoimmune retinopathy. The patient was found to have anti-retinal antibodies against carbonic anhydrase II and enolase proteins with a negative genetic retinal dystrophy panel. Malignancy work-up was negative, but the patient was diagnosed with MGUS, a premalignant condition. The patient was treated with immunosuppressive therapies, with rituximab demonstrating the most robust therapeutic response with respect to patient symptoms and ophthalmic testing.

Conclusions

MGUS should be considered as a potential etiology of autoimmune retinopathy in patients without other autoimmune or malignant disease processes. Immunosuppressive therapy may be helpful in limiting disease progression, with rituximab showing efficacy in retinopathy refractory to other agents.

Non-paraneoplastic related retinopathy: clinical challenges and review

Autoimmune retinopathy (AIR) is a rare inflammatory condition characterized by progressive visual loss, abnormalities in visual fields and electroretinographic exams, along with presence of circulating anti-retinal antibodies. There are two main forms of AIR: paraneoplastic AIR (pAIR) and presumed non-paraneoplastic AIR (npAIR). NpAIR is considered a diagnosis of exclusion, since it is typically made after other causes of retinopathy have been investigated and the absence of malignancy is confirmed. Work-up of a npAIR case is challenging since there are no standartizaded protocols for diagnosis and treatment. The treatment regimen may vary from case to case, and it can be best guided by a set of parameters including electrophysiological responses, visual outcomes, and presence of anti-retinal antibodies. The purpose of this review is to summarize the principal clinical features, investigation, and management of npAIR.

Clinical and molecular characterization of non-syndromic retinal dystrophy due to c.175G>A mutation in ceroid lipofuscinosis neuronal 3 (CLN3)

PURPOSE

Mutation of the CLN3 gene, associated with juvenile neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis, has recently been associated with late-onset, non-syndromic retinal dystrophy. Herein we describe the multimodal imaging, immunological and systemic features of an adult with compound heterozygous CLN3 mutations.

METHODS

A 50-year-old female with non-syndromic retinal dystrophy from the age of 36 years underwent multimodal retinal imaging, electroretinography, neuroimaging, immunological studies and genetic testing. CLN3 transcripts were amplified from patient leukocytes by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction and characterized by Sanger sequencing.

RESULTS

Visual acuity declined to 6/12 and 6/76 due to asymmetrical central scotoma. ERG responses became electronegative and patient's serum contained anti-retinal antibodies. Final visual acuity stabilized at 6/60 bilaterally 3 years after peri-ocular steroid and rituximab infusion. Genetic testing revealed compound heterozygous CLN3 mutations: the 1.02 kb deletion and a novel missense mutation (c.175G>A). In silico, analyses predicted the c.175G>A mutation disrupted an exonic splice enhancer site in exon 3. In patient leukocytes, CLN3 expression was reduced and novel CLN3 transcripts lacking exon 3 were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Our case study shows that (1) non-syndromic CLN3 disease leads to rod and delayed primary cone degeneration resulting in constricting peripheral field and enlarging central scotoma and, (2) the c.175G>A CLN3 mutation, altered splicing of the CLN3 gene. Overall, we provide comprehensive clinical characterization of a patient with non-syndromic CLN3 disease.