One-year risk of serious infection in patients treated with certolizumab pegol as compared with other TNF inhibitors in a real-world setting: data from a national U.S. rheumatoid arthritis registry

A narrative review of the comparative safety of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have improved the outcomes of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). DMARDs are classified into three categories: conventional synthetic DMARDs, biological DMARDs (including biosimilars), and targeted synthetic DMARDs. DMARDs, by way of their effect on the immune system, are associated with increased risk of adverse events, including infections, malignancies, cardiovascular disease, gastrointestinal perforations, and other less common events.

AREAS COVERED

In this narrative literature review performed with searches of the PubMed database from 1 January 2010 through 1 January 2023, we compare the risk of safety events between DMARDs using data from both randomized clinical trials and observational studies.

EXPERT OPINION

DMARD use in RA is associated with higher rates of serious infections, tuberculosis reactivation, opportunistic infections, and possibly malignancies. Specific biologic DMARDs and higher doses are associated with elevated risks of various adverse events (gastrointestinal perforations, thromboembolism, serious infection). Shared decision-making is paramount when choosing a treatment regimen for patients based on their own comorbidities. JAKi are the newest class of medications used for RA with robust safety data provided in clinical trials. However, more real-world evidence and phase-IV pharmacovigilance data are needed to better understand comparative safety profile of DMARDs in RA.

Biologics Versus JAK Inhibitors. Part I: Cancer Risk. A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Biological drugs (BD) and Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have revolutionized the treatment of diverse dermatoses. However, there are concerns regarding their safety, especially the risk of cancer and opportunistic infections. Here, we discuss the risk of cancer associated with the BD and JAKi used in dermatology.

METHODS

A narrative review was carried out. All relevant articles evaluating the risk of cancer associated with BD or JAKi and published between January 2010 and February 2024 were selected.

RESULTS

Multiple large studies have evaluated the association between BD, JAKi and cancer risk. However, there is a lack of prospective, comparative studies. Overall, patients undergoing BD and JAKi present a cutaneous cancer incidence similar to that in the general population. The drugs more strongly associated with non-skin cancer risk were anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNFs) agents and JAKi (especially tofacitinib and oral ruxolitinib). This risk appears to increase with age, the presence of other factors (such as chronic immunosuppression from previous drugs or other comorbidities), and specific diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and myelodysplastic syndrome. Conversely, BD such as interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors may even reduce the risk of some visceral and hematological malignancies. In patients with dermatological conditions such as psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, the risk of malignancies may be lower than in other subgroups, and probably comparable to the general population.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of cancer in patients undergoing BD or JAKi is generally low. This incidence can be higher in elderly patients with RA or myelodysplastic syndrome, and in those undergoing prolonged therapy with tofacitinib or ruxolitinib (oral), or anti-TNF agents.

Infections in the era of immunobiologicals

Immunobiologicals represent an innovative therapeutic option in dermatology. They are indicated in severe and refractory cases of different diseases when there is contraindication, intolerance, or failure of conventional systemic therapy and in cases with significant impairment of patient quality of life. The main immunobiologicals used in dermatology basically include inhibitors of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (anti-TNF), inhibitors of interleukin-12 and -23 (anti-IL12/23), inhibitors of interleukin-17 and its receptor (anti-IL17), inhibitors of interleukin-23 (anti-IL23), rituximab (anti-CD20 antibody), dupilumab (anti-IL4/IL13) and intravenous immunoglobulin. Their immunomodulatory action may be associated with an increase in the risk of infections in the short and long term, and each case must be assessed individually, according to the risk inherent to the drug, the patient general condition, and the need for precautions. This article will discuss the main risks of infection associated with the use of immunobiologicals, addressing the risk in immunocompetent and immunosuppressed patients, vaccination, fungal infections, tuberculosis, leprosy, and viral hepatitis, and how to manage the patient in the most diverse scenarios.

Real-World Incidence and Determinants of Infection in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated With Golimumab After a Median Follow-Up Time of 27 Months

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the long-term incidence of infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with subcutaneous golimumab (GOL) in Canadian routine care, assess the effect of infections on GOL retention, and explore factors associated with infection incidence.

METHODS

Patients with RA enrolled in the Biologic Treatment Registry Across Canada (BioTRAC) initiating GOL treatment were included. The incidence density rates (IDRs) of total infection (TI), serious infection (SI), and nonserious infection (NSI) were calculated for the overall follow-up (90 months) and by 6-month intervals. Determinants of infection over time or within the first 6 months were explored using generalized estimating equation models and logistic regression, respectively.

RESULTS

Five hundred thirty patients were included; mean baseline age was 57.7 years and RA duration was 8.0 years. Over an average follow-up of 27.0 months, the IDR for TIs was 35.1 events per 100 person-years (PYs), the majority occurring during the first 6 months; IDRs for NSIs and SIs were 32.9 and 2.2 events per 100 PYs, respectively. No predictors were identified for infection incidence within 6 months. Comorbid pulmonary disease was associated with significantly higher odds of TIs and NSIs over time, whereas higher age and high corticosteroid (CS) dose (> 5 mg/day) predicted higher odds of SIs. Incidence of SIs, but not NSIs, was associated with significantly higher odds of GOL discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

Long-term GOL treatment was associated with relatively low infection rates, most being nonserious and occurring during the first 6 months. Pulmonary disease, higher age, and high CS dose were identified as significant predictors of infections. SIs, but not NSIs, predicted higher odds of GOL discontinuation. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00741793).

Incidence of severe infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis taking biological agents: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review was to estimate the population-based incidence of and determine the types of severe infection and deaths experienced by patients with rheumatoid arthritis taking biological agents.

INTRODUCTION

Since the late 1990s, various biological and synthetic drugs have been developed to treat rheumatoid arthritis. In recent years, the incidence of severe infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Western nations has been determined by observational studies; however, no systematic review has been conducted on this topic.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

The following inclusion criteria were considered: i) observational studies on patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with biological agents; ii) studies reporting the number of severe infections requiring hospitalization for treatment; iii) studies reporting person-years of observation data; and iv) studies based on rheumatoid arthritis registries, medical records from rheumatology centers, or insurance claim databases.

METHODS

PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science were searched to identify published studies. The reference lists of all studies selected for critical appraisal were screened for additional studies. Unpublished studies were searched on MedNar and OpenGrey databases. All the searches were updated on December 6, 2021. After removing the duplicates, 2 independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts against the inclusion criteria and then assessed full texts against the criteria. Two reviewers independently appraised the study and outcome levels for methodological quality using the critical appraisal instrument for cohort studies from JBI. Two reviewers extracted the relevant information related to severe infection and drugs.

RESULTS

Fifty-two studies from 21 countries reported severe infection rates associated with using 9 biologic agents. In total, 18,428 infections with 395,065 person-years of biologic drug exposure were included in the analysis. Thirty-five studies included infections in outpatients receiving intravenous antibiotic therapy. Fifteen studies reported the first episode of infection, and the remaining studies did not specify either the first or all of the episodes of infection. Inclusion of viral infection and/or opportunistic infection varied among studies. Fifteen studies reported the site of infection, and respiratory, skin/soft tissue, urinary tract infection, and sepsis/bacteremia were commonly reported. Ten studies reported the case fatality rates, ranging from 2.5% to 22.2%. Meta-analysis was conducted for 7 biologic agents and conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. The infection rate varied from 0.9 to 18.0/100 person-years. The meta-analysis revealed an infection rate of 4.2/100 person-years (95% CI 3.5-4.9) among patients receiving tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (heterogeneity 98.2%). The meta-analysis for the other 3 biologic agents revealed a point estimate of 5.5 to 8.7/100 person-years with high heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis indicated that registry-based studies were less likely to have very low or very high infection rates compared with other data sources. The definition of infection, the patient composition of the cohorts, and the type of databases appeared to be the primary sources of clinical and methodological heterogeneity.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42020175137.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to high statistical heterogeneity, the meta-analysis was not suited to estimating a summary measure of the infection rate. Developing standardized data collection is necessary to compare infection rates across studies.

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.

Biologic Agents and Secondary Immune Deficiency

Biologics are protein-based pharmaceuticals derived from living organisms or their proteins. We discuss the mechanism of action for currently approved biologics and a give summary of the studies on immune suppression from biologics. Most of these studies have been conducted with rheumatology patients, and many in adults. Their relevance for children is explored and existing gaps in data for children are highlighted.

Postapproval Comparative Safety Study of Tofacitinib and Biological Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs: 5-Year Results from a United States-Based Rheumatoid Arthritis Registry

OBJECTIVE

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We compared 5-year adverse event (AE) incidence rates (IRs) between patients initiating tofacitinib and those initiating new biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) within the United States (US) Corrona RA registry.

METHODS

IRs (number of first events/100 patient-years) of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), serious infection events (SIEs), herpes zoster (HZ), malignancies, and death were estimated among tofacitinib and bDMARD initiators, regardless of dose/schedule, between November 6, 2012 (US Food and Drug Administration tofacitinib approval), and July 31, 2018 (follow-up through January 31, 2019). Propensity score (PS) methods were used to control for nonrandom prescribing practices. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated to compare rates using multivariable-adjusted Cox regression. Different risk windows were used for acute (MACE, SIEs, HZ, and venous thromboembolic events [VTEs]) and long-term (malignancy and death) events. VTEs were assessed descriptively.

RESULTS

For MACE, SIEs, and HZ, 1999 (3152.1 patient-years) and 8358 (12 869.4 years) tofacitinib and bDMARD initiators were included, respectively; for malignancy/death, 1999 (4505.6 patient-years) and 6354 (16 670.8 patient-years) initiators were included, respectively. AE rates were similar across cohorts, except for HZ, which was significantly higher with tofacitinib versus bDMARDs (PS-trimmed adjusted HR 2.32; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.43-3.75). There were 45 (zero serious) and 88 (five serious) HZ events with tofacitinib and bDMARDs, respectively. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated similar results. VTE IRs (95% CI) were 0.29 (0.13-0.54) and 0.33 (0.24-0.45) for tofacitinib and bDMARDs, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In this registry analysis, both cohorts had similar MACE, SIE, malignancy, death, and VTE rates; HZ rates were higher for tofacitinib initaitors than for bDMARD initiators.

The Key Comorbidities in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Narrative Review

Comorbidities in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are often associated with poor health outcomes and increased mortality. Treatment decisions should take into account these comorbidities due to known or suspected associations with certain drug classes. In clinical practice, it is critical to balance potential treatment benefit against the possible risks for comorbidities as well as the articular manifestations of RA. This review summarises the current literature relating to prevalence and risk factors for the important comorbidities of cardiovascular disease, infections, lymphomas and nonmelanoma skin cancers in patients with RA. The impact on patient outcomes and the interplay between these comorbidities and the therapeutic options currently available, including tumour necrosis factor inhibitors and newer biological therapies, are also explored. As newer RA therapies are developed, and patients gain wider and earlier access to advanced therapies, in part due to the emergence of biosimilars, it is important to consider the prevention or treatment of comorbidities as part of the overall management of RA.

Risk of opportunistic infections in patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating abatacept: cumulative clinical trial data

BACKGROUND

To evaluate incidence of opportunistic infections (OIs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with abatacept in clinical trials.

METHODS

This pooled analysis of 16 randomized, double-blind/open-label trials, with ≥ 1 abatacept (intravenous or subcutaneous) arm, and with/without placebo control covered cumulative (controlled short-term and open-label long-term) abatacept exposure periods. OIs were analyzed separately in controlled (abatacept and placebo individually) and cumulative periods. OIs were identified using a prespecified list; events were independently adjudicated. Unadjusted incidence rates (IRs; per 100 patient-years) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

In cumulative periods, 7044 patients received abatacept, with a mean (standard deviation) duration of exposure of 36.9 (26.2) months (21,274 patient-years of exposure). IRs (95% CIs) of OIs were 0.17 (0.05-0.43) for abatacept and 0.56 (0.22-1.15) for placebo during the controlled periods and 0.21 (0.15-0.28) for abatacept during the cumulative periods. There was 1 case of tuberculosis in both the abatacept (IR [95% CI] 0.04 [0.00-0.24]) and placebo (IR [95% CI] 0.08 [0.00-0.44]) groups during the controlled periods; 13 verified tuberculosis cases (IR [95% CI] 0.06 [0.03-0.10]) were reported in the cumulative period. Herpes zoster was reported numerically more often with abatacept (IR 1.9 [1.4-2.5]), versus placebo (1.7 [1.1-2.6]) in the controlled periods; within the cumulative period, herpes zoster IR (95% CI) was 1.53 (1.36-1.71) for abatacept-treated patients.

CONCLUSION

In controlled periods of the clinical trials, abatacept-treated patients had similarly low rates of OIs compared with placebo-treated patients. Overall, OI rates were similar among abatacept-treated patients in the controlled and cumulative periods and consistent with the ranges reported in the literature.

Identification of putative master regulators in rheumatoid arthritis synovial fibroblasts using gene expression data and network inference

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease that affects the synovial joints of the body. Rheumatoid arthritis fibroblast-like synoviocytes (RA FLS) are central players in the disease pathogenesis, as they are involved in the secretion of cytokines and proteolytic enzymes, exhibit invasive traits, high rate of self-proliferation and an apoptosis-resistant phenotype. We aim at characterizing transcription factors (TFs) that are master regulators in RA FLS and could potentially explain phenotypic traits. We make use of differentially expressed genes in synovial tissue from patients suffering from RA and osteoarthritis (OA) to infer a TF co-regulatory network, using dedicated software. The co-regulatory network serves as a reference to analyze microarray and single-cell RNA-seq data from isolated RA FLS. We identified five master regulators specific to RA FLS, namely BATF, POU2AF1, STAT1, LEF1 and IRF4. TF activity of the identified master regulators was also estimated with the use of two additional, independent software. The identified TFs contribute to the regulation of inflammation, proliferation and apoptosis, as indicated by the comparison of their differentially expressed target genes with hallmark molecular signatures derived from the Molecular Signatures Database (MSigDB). Our results show that TFs influence could be used to identify putative master regulators of phenotypic traits and suggest novel, druggable targets for experimental validation.

Long-term effectiveness and safety of infliximab, golimumab and golimumab-IV in rheumatoid arthritis patients from a Canadian prospective observational registry

BACKGROUND

Long-term clinical registries are essential tools to evaluate new therapies in a patient population that differs from those in randomized clinical trials. The objectives are to describe the profile of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with anti-TNF agents in Canadian routine care.

METHODS

RA patients eligible for treatment with Infliximab (IFX), golimumab (GLM) or intravenous golimumab (GLM-IV) as per their respective Canadian product monographs were enrolled into the BioTRAC registry between 2002 and 2017. Study visits occurred at baseline and every 6 months thereafter. Effectiveness was assessed by changes in disease activity. Safety was evaluated by the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and drug survival.

RESULTS

Of the 890 IFX-, 530 GLM- and 157 GLM-IV-treated patients, the proportion of females ranged from 77.0-86.6%, the mean ages from 55.8-57.7 and the mean disease duration from 6.5-8.6 years. A significant decrease in baseline disease duration and disease activity parameters (DAS, TJC, SJC, HAQ, AM stiffness, MDGA, PtGA, CRP, ESR) was observed over time. Treatment with IFX, GLM- and GLM-IV significantly improved all disease parameters over time. The incidence of AEs was 105, 113 and 82.6 /100 PYs and the incidence of SAEs was 11.7, 11.2 and 4.68 /100 PYs for IFX, GLM- and GLM-IV-treated patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Differences in baseline characteristics between patients treated with an anti-TNFs over time shows the evolution of treatment modalities over time. All treatments significantly reduced disease activity and improved functionality in a similar fashion. The incidence of adverse events was consistent with the safety profiles of IFX and GLM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00741793 (Retrospectively registered on August 26, 2008).

Fungal Infections Potentiated by Biologics

Biologic therapies including monoclonal antibodies, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and other agents represent a notable expansion in the pharmacotherapy armamentarium in treatment of a variety of diseases. Many of these therapies possess direct or indirect immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory effects, which have been associated with bacterial, viral, and fungal opportunistic infections. Careful screening of baseline risk factors before initiation, targeted preventive measures, and vigilant monitoring while on active biologic therapy mitigate these risks as use of biologics becomes more commonplace. This review compiles reported evidence of fungal infections associated with these agents with a focus on the tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitor class.

Risk of admission to hospital for serious infection after initiating tofacitinib versus biologic DMARDs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a multidatabase cohort study

BACKGROUND

The risk of serious infection is a major concern when prescribing a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) for rheumatoid arthritis. Little evidence exists with regard to serious infection risk associated with tofacitinib, a targeted synthetic (ts)DMARD, compared with biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) among patients with rheumatoid arthritis. We compared the risk of serious infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating tofacitinib versus one of the seven bDMARDs.

METHODS

In this multidatabase cohort study, we identified eight mutually exclusive groups of patients with rheumatoid arthritis initiating tofacitinib or one of the seven bDMARDs using US public (Medicare 20012-15) and private (Optum Clinformatics 2012-18 and IBM MarketScan 2012-17) health insurance programmes. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, and had one inpatient visit or two or more outpatient visits (7-365 days apart) for rheumatoid arthritis using International Classification of Diseases 9th and 10th revision codes. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of admission to hospital for serious infection including bacterial, viral, or opportunistic infection based on the inpatient principal diagnosis code. Secondary outcomes were individual types of serious infections and herpes zoster. We adjusted for more than 60 potential confounders through propensity score-based inverse probability treatment weighting in each database. Database-specific adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) were combined using a fixed-effects meta-analysis.

FINDINGS

We identified 130 718 patients with rheumatoid arthritis across the three databases. During 100 790 person-years of follow-up, 3140 serious infections occurred (crude incidence rate per 100 person-years 3·12, 95% CI 3·01-3·23). The aHR for serious infection associated with tofacitinib was 1·41 (95% CI 1·15-1·73) versus etanercept, 1·20 (0·97-1·49) versus abatacept, 1·23 (0·94-1·62) versus golimumab, and 1·17 (0·89-1·53) versus tocilizumab. The serious infection risk with tofacitinib was similar to adalimumab (1·06, 0·87-1·30) and certolizumab (1·02, 0·80-1·29), and was lower than infliximab (0·81, 0·65-1·00). Tofacitinib was associated with a 2-fold higher risk of herpes zoster versus all bDMARDs.

INTERPRETATION

This study found potential differences between tofacitinib and several bDMARDs in the risk of admission to hospital for serious infection, as well as herpes zoster, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. These results contribute to the evolving understanding of the overall risk-benefit profile of tofacitinib.

FUNDING

Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, MA, USA.

Infection risk in patients undergoing treatment for inflammatory arthritis: non-biologics versus biologics

Introduction: Despite the therapeutic effectiveness of biologics targeting immune cells or cytokines in patients with inflammatory arthritis, which reflects their pathogenic roles, an increased infection risk is observed in those undergoing biological treatment. However, there are limited data regarding the comparison of infection risks in inflammatory arthritis patients treated with non-biologics (csDMARDs), biologics (bDMARDs), including tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and non-TNF inhibitors, or targeted synthetic (ts)DMARDs.Areas covered: Through a review of English-language literature as of 30 June 2019, we focus on the existing evidence on the risk of infections caused by bacteria, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and hepatitis virus in inflammatory arthritis patients undergoing treatment with csDMARDs, bDMARDs, or tsDMARDs.Expert opinion: While the risks of bacterial and mycobacterial infection are increased in arthritis patients treated with csDMARDs, the risks are further higher in those receiving bDMARDs therapy, particularly TNF inhibitors. Regarding HBV infection, antiviral therapy may effectively prevent HBV reactivation in patients receiving bDMARDs, especially rituximab. However, more data are needed to establish effective preventive strategies for HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients. It seems safe to use cyclosporine and TNF inhibitors in patients with HCV infection, while those undergoing rituximab therapies should be frequently monitored for HCV activity.Abbreviations: ABT: abatacept; ADA: adalimumab; AS: ankylosing spondylitis; bDMARDs: biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs; CKD: chronic kidney disease; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CS: corticosteroids; CsA: cyclosporine A; csDMARDs: conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs; CZP: certolizumab; DAAs: direct-acting antiviral agents; DM: diabetes mellitus; DOT: directly observed therapy; EIN: Emerging Infections Network; ETN: etanercept; GOL: golimumab; GPRD: General Practice Research Database; HBV: hepatitis B virus; HBVr: HBV reactivation; HBsAg+: HBsAg-positive; HBsAg-/anti-HBc+: HBsAg-negative anti-HBc antibodies-positive; HCV: hepatitis C virus; HCQ: hydroxychloroquine: IFX: infliximab; IL-6: interleukin-6; JAK: Janus kinase; LEF: leflunomide; LTBI: latent tuberculosis infection; mAb: monoclonal antibody; MTX: methotrexate; OR: odds ratio; PsA: psoriatic arthritis; PMS: post-marketing surveillance; RA: rheumatoid arthritis; TNF: tumor necrosis factor; TNFi: tumor necrosis factor inhibitor; SCK: secukinumab; SSZ: sulfasalazine; TOZ: tocilizumab; RCT: randomized controlled trial; RR: relative risk; RTX: rituximab; 3HP: 3-month once-weekly isoniazid plus rifapentine; TB: tuberculosis; tsDMARDs: targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs; UTK: ustekinumab; WHO: World Health Organization.

[Acute exacerbation of the underlying disease or infection : Which diagnostics are warranted in patients with immunosuppressive treatment for inflammatory rheumatic diseases?]

Infectious diseases always have to be considered in the differential diagnosis of new symptoms in patients with immunosuppressive treatment for established inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Knowledge about the specific frequency and type of infections that can be expected under immunosuppressive treatment of inflammatory rheumatic diseases as well as the diagnostic value of laboratory tests and imaging results can facilitate the often difficult differential diagnosis.

Biologic Agents and Secondary Immune Deficiency

Biologics are protein-based pharmaceuticals derived from living organisms or their proteins. We discuss the mechanism of action for currently approved biologics and a give summary of the studies on immune suppression from biologics. Most of these studies have been conducted with rheumatology patients, and many in adults. Their relevance for children is explored and existing gaps in data for children are highlighted.

Efficacy and tolerability of certolizumab pegol in Crohn's disease in clinical practice

AIM

To assess the efficacy and tolerance of certolizumab pegol (CP) in patients with Crohn's disease (CD) treated in the Department of inflammatory bowel diseases of the A.S. Loginov Moscow Clinical Research Center and to determine the predictors of response to therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients with CD who had received the treatment of CP were observed prospectively for at least 6 months or until the date of discontinuation of the drug. The effectiveness of the study was assessed response to therapy by the 6th week, maintaining the clinical response (6th and 26th weeks), the dynamics of endoscopic parameters by the 10th and 54th week of therapy, long-term maintenance of remission, healing fistula. Used univariant and multivariate analyses of predictors of response to treatment.

RESULTS

The study included 39 patients: 12 (30.7%) men and 27 (69.3%) female, the average duration of observation was 104 weeks. The interdepartmental range was in the range from 28 to 158 weeks. Clinical improvement occurred in 38 out of 39 (97.4 %) patients with CD. Comparative analysis of response to treatment with CP have bionaive patients previously treated with another inhibitor of TNF-α. In the group of bionaive response to therapy in a month, 6 months and at the end of the observation period occurred at 100.0%, 95.0% and 95.0%, respectively. In the group of patients previously treated with GSI, the response rate was about 94.4 %, 88.9 % and 77.7% week 54 endoscopic response and endoscopic remission was maintained in 46,2% and 30,1% patients, complete healing of the mucosa on the background of maintenance therapy, CP, was preserved in 20.5% of patients with Crohn's disease. In the group of patients with perianal lesions (n=13) complete closure of all fistulas was observed in 5 (38.6 %) patients, partial response was observed in 4 patients (30,7%) patients, in 4 (30.7 %) closure of fistulas occurred. The frequency of adverse events was 0 cases (0.0%). The dose escalation was required in 3 patients (7,7%) patients with CD. Dose escalation in our study required patients with high initial CDAI and previous inefficiencies of the other two inhibitors of TNF-α. Reliable predictors of secondary loss of response and need for dose escalation of the drug has been the continued level of CRP >5 mg/l after 2 weeks initiation of therapy CP and smoking.

CONCLUSION

The obtained results demonstrate the efficacy and tolerability profile of CP appropriate for long-term CD therapy in real clinical practice.

Enhanced anti-metastatic bioactivity of an IGF-TRAP re-engineered to improve physicochemical properties

The insulin-like growth factor (IGF) axis has been implicated in the progression of malignant disease and identified as a clinically important therapeutic target. Several IGF-1 receptor (IGF-1R) targeting drugs including humanized monoclonal antibodies have advanced to phase II/III clinical trials, but to date, have not progressed to clinical use, due, at least in part, to interference with insulin receptor signalling. We previously reported on the production of a soluble fusion protein consisting of the extracellular domain of human IGF-1R fused to the Fc portion of human IgG1 (first generation IGF-TRAP) that bound human IGF-1 and IGF-2 with a 3 log higher affinity than insulin. We showed that the IGF-TRAP had potent anti-cancer activity in several pre-clinical models of aggressive carcinomas. Here we report on the re-engineering of the IGF-TRAP with the aim of improving physicochemical properties and suitability for clinical applications. We show that cysteine-serine substitutions in the Fc hinge region of IGF-TRAP eliminated high-molecular-weight oligomerized species, while a further addition of a flexible linker, not only improved the pharmacokinetic profile, but also enhanced the therapeutic profile of the IGF-TRAP, as evaluated in an experimental colon carcinoma metastasis model. Dose-response profiles of the modified IGF-TRAPs correlated with their bio-availability profiles, as measured by the IGF kinase-receptor-activation (KIRA) assay, providing a novel, surrogate biomarker for drug efficacy. This study provides a compelling example of structure-based re-engineering of Fc-fusion-based biologics for better manufacturability that also significantly improved pharmacological parameters. It identifies the re-engineered IGF-TRAP as a potent anti-cancer therapeutic.

Bimodal Function of Anti-TNF Treatment: Shall We Be Concerned about Anti-TNF Treatment in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Heart Failure?

Treatment with anti-TNF-α (tumor necrosis factor), one of the pivotal cytokines, was introduced to clinical practice at the end of last century and revolutionized the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) as well as many other inflammatory conditions. Such a treatment may however bring many safety issues regarding infections, tuberculosis, as well as cardiovascular diseases, including heart failure. Given the central role of proinflammatory cytokines in RA, atherosclerosis, and congestive heart failure (CHF), such a treatment might result in better control of the RA process on the one side and improvement of heart function on the other. Unfortunately, at the beginning of this century two randomized controlled trials failed to show any benefit of anti-TNF treatment in patients with heart failure (HF), suggesting direct negative impact of the treatment on morbidity and mortality in HF patients. As a result the anti-TNF treatment is contraindicated in all patients with heart failure and a substantial portion of patients with RA and impaired heart function are not able to benefit from the treatment. The role of TNF in CHF and RA differs substantially with regard to the source and pathophysiological function of the cytokine in both conditions, therefore negative data from CHF studies should be interpreted with caution. At least some of RA patients with heart failure may benefit from anti-TNF treatment, as it results not only in the reduction of inflammation but also contributes significantly to the improvement of cardiac function. The paper addresses the epidemiological data of safety of anti-TNF treatment in RA patients with the special emphasis to basic pathophysiological mechanisms via which TNF may act differently in both diseases.

Preventive therapy for tuberculosis in rheumatological patients undergoing therapy with biological drugs

INTRODUCTION

Latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) accounts for almost a quarter of the world population, and, in 5-10% of the subjects with impaired immune-response against M. tuberculosis growth, it may progress to active tuberculosis (TB). In this review, we focus on the need to propose a screening for LTBI including preventive therapy offer in rheumatic patients undergoing therapy with biological drugs. Areas covered: We report on evidence that biologics are associated with an increased risk of active TB reactivation. This effect seems to be mainly limited to treatment with anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents, while non-anti-TNF-targeted biologics are not likely associated to any increased risk. We introduce the concept that the patients' coexisting host-related risk factors, such as comorbidities, are crucial to identify those at higher risk to reactivate TB. We report that preventive TB therapy is well tolerated in patients treated with biological drugs. Expert commentary: Availability of non-anti-TNF targeted biologics, that are not associated with an increased risk of TB reactivation, offers a great opportunity to tailor a therapeutic intervention at low/absent TB risk. After proper LTBI screening investigations, preventive TB therapy has been demonstrated to be effective and well-tolerated to reduce the risk of TB reactivation in rheumatic patients requiring biological drugs.