Combination therapy of cyclosporine A with methotrexate or hydroxychloroquine in refractory rheumatoid arthritis

Pharmacologic Treatment of Transplant Recipients Infected With SARS-CoV-2: Considerations Regarding Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Drug-Drug Interactions

COVID-19 is a novel infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory distress (SARS)-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Several therapeutic options are currently emerging but none with universal consensus or proven efficacy. Solid organ transplant recipients are perceived to be at increased risk of severe COVID-19 because of their immunosuppressed conditions due to chronic use of immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs). It is therefore likely that solid organ transplant recipients will be treated with these experimental antivirals.

The importance of inhibition of a catabolic pathway of methotrexate metabolism in its efficacy for rheumatoid arthritis

Methotrexate (MTX), an antifolate, is the anchor drug for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It is inexpensive, effective, and generally safe. When clinical response is inadequate, biological therapies are commonly used in combination with MTX. However, biological agents have safety concerns (i.e. infections, malignancy) and the addition of a biologic agent is expensive, making strategies to improve MTX efficacy important. Inhibition of pathways of folate metabolism involving purine metabolism by MTX, have been traditionally emphasized as important in MTX efficacy. However, inhibition MTX catabolism may also be important. MTX is irreversibly hydroxylated to form 7-hydroxy methotrexate (7-OH-MTX) by aldehyde oxidase (EC 1.2.3.1) (AOX). Catabolism of MTX to 7-OH-MTX is the first metabolic process imposed on an oral dose of MTX and will alter subsequent interactions of MTX with other enzymes. 7-OH-MTX is less potent than MTX in the treatment of rat adjuvant arthritis. RA patients with a low capacity to catabolize MTX to 7-OH-MTX do better clinically than individuals who are rapid formers of 7-OH-MTX. Therefore, altering the catabolism of MTX may be an innovative way to improve MTX efficacy. Raloxifene is a FDA-approved therapy for postmenopausal osteoporosis and for the reduction of invasive breast cancers but has no known activity in RA. Raloxifene is a potent inhibitor of human liver AOX. Postmenopausal women with RA frequently have low bone mineral density and would be candidates for raloxifene and MTX combination therapy. The effect of raloxifene on MTX metabolism has never been studied. Our hypothesis is that in postmenopausal women with RA and osteoporosis treated with MTX and raloxifene, the inhibition of AOX with resultant decreased formation of 7-OH MTX; will increase MTX levels and improve MTX efficacy. This hypothesis could be studied in an open-label, proof of concept clinical study in individuals before and after the addition of raloxifene. Red blood cell MTX and 7-OH-MTX levels and RA disease activity (DAS28) would be measured. In possible future studies, there are dietary substances, as supplements, (e.g. epigallocatechin gallate in green tea and resveratrol) which inhibit human liver AOX which could be evaluated.

The Use of Cyclosporine A in Rheumatology: a 2016 Comprehensive Review

Cyclosporine A, an inhibitor of calcineurin, exerts an immunomodulator action interfering with T cell activation. Even though novel therapeutic tools have emerged, CyA still represents a suitable option in several clinical rheumatology settings. This is the case of refractory nephritis and cytopenias associated with systemic lupus erythematosus. Furthermore, CyA is a valued therapeutic tool in the management of uveitis and thrombophlebitis in course of Behçet's disease. Topical CyA has been proven to be beneficial in the dry eye of Sjogren's syndrome, whereas oral treatment with CyA can be considered for the severe complications of adult onset Still's disease. CyA provides a therapeutic option in psoriatic arthritis, being rather effective in skin disease. CyA is currently regarded as a second-line option for patients with inflammatory myopathies refractory to standard regimen. CyA is used even in paediatric rheumatology, in particular in the management of juvenile dermatomyositis and macrophage activation syndrome associated with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Importantly, CyA has been shown to suppress the replication of HCV, and it can thus be safely prescribed to those patients with chronic hepatitis C. Noteworthy, CyA can be administered throughout the gestation course. Surely, caution should be paid to CyA safety profile, in particular to its nephrotoxicity. Even though most evidence comes from small and uncontrolled studies with few randomised controlled trials, CyA should be still regarded as a valid therapeutic tool in 2016 rheumatology.

Therapy and pharmacological properties of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine in treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis and related diseases

OBJECTIVES

This review examines the pharmacokinetics, modes of action and therapeutic properties of the anti-malarial drugs, hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine (CQ), in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and related conditions, as well as osteoarthritis (OA).

KEY FINDINGS

Both HCQ and CQ have historically been employed successfully for the treatment of SLE and RA for over 70 years. HCQ has been used extensively for SLE where it has a good reputation for controlling the dermatological complications in SLE. It has also been reported to effectively control the symptoms of Sjøgren's syndrome, as well as preventing thrombosis in phospholipid antibody (aPL) syndrome. In RA and SLE, HCQ is preferred because of the lower incidence of gastrointestinal adverse reactions compared with CQ and it might have a lower risk of ocular adverse reactions. There is increasing evidence that HCQ may reduce atherosclerosis and risks of cardiovascular disease in rheumatic patients. Both HCQ and CQ have been shown to improve glycaemia and reduce the risks of type II diabetes mellitus. Although both HCQ and CQ are effective in low-moderate RA, HCQ is now preferred as part of combination therapy for more severe disease. The advantages of combination therapy are that the doses of the individual drugs may be lowered so reducing adverse reactions. Both HCQ and CQ are diastereoisomers, have basic properties and are given as the sulphate and phosphate salts. While being relatively well absorbed orally and with good bioavailability, they have long and variable plasma terminal elimination half-lives (approximately 40-60 days). This reflects their high volume of distribution, V D (HCQ 44,000L; CQ 65,000L) which extends into aqueous compartments, long mean residence time (HCQ 1300 h; CQ 900 h) and with about half the drugs (metabolites) undergoing renal clearance. The strong binding to melanin reflects the ocular injury and dermatological properties of these drugs. The consensus is that the occurrence of ocular adverse reactions can be minimised by close attention to the dose (which should be set on a body weight basis) with regular (e.g. quarterly) retinal examination. Although HCQ and CQ can pass through the placenta, the use of these drugs during pregnancy does not appear to risk harm to the baby and might be beneficial to the mother with SLE and her child by controlling the SLE disease activity, which is known to be an important factor affecting pregnancy outcome. The modes of action of HCQ and CQ in these arthritides represent somewhat of an enigma. Undoubtedly, these drugs have multiple actions related, in part, their ability to accumulate in lysosomes and autophagosomes of phagocytic cells as well as affecting MHC Class II expression and antigen presentation; actions of the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines [e.g. interleukin-1 (IL-1) tumour necrosis factor-α (TNFα)]; control of toll-like receptor-9 activation; and leucocyte generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS); i.e. antioxidant activity. The actions of these drugs on T and B cells are less clear but may depend on these leucocyte-mediated actions. Anti-malarials also protect against cytokine-mediated cartilage resorption. This and other actions may underlie the potential benefits in treating OA. The exact relationships of these various actions, mostly determined in vitro, have not been specifically defined in vivo or ex vivo in relation to clinical efficacy.

OUTCOMES

HCQ and CQ have a good reputation for being effective and relatively safe treatments in SLE, mild-moderate RA and Sjøgren's syndrome. There is need for (a) more information on their mode of action in relation to the control of these diseases, (b) scope for developing formulations that have improved pharmacokinetic and therapeutic properties and safety, and (c) further exploring their use in drug combinations not only with other disease modifying agents but also with biologics.

Duration of rheumatoid arthritis influences the degree of functional improvement in clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Functional capacity is an important outcome in rheumatoid arthritis and is generally measured using the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index (HAQ). Functional limitation incorporates both activity and damage. Because irreversible damage increases over time, the HAQ may be less likely to show improvement in late than in early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relation between sensitivity to change of the HAQ and duration of rheumatoid arthritis in reports of clinical trials.

METHODS

Data were pooled from clinical trials that measured responses of HAQ scores at three or six months. The effect size of the HAQ was calculated and linear regression used to predict the effect size by duration of rheumatoid arthritis at group level. Treatment effect was adjusted for by including the effect sizes of pain scores and of tender joint counts as additional independent variables in separate models. Subgroup analysis employed contemporary regimens (methotrexate, leflunomide, combination therapies, and TNF inhibitors) only.

RESULTS

36 studies with 64 active treatment arms and 7628 patients (disease duration 2.5 months to 12.2 years) were included. The effect sizes of the HAQ decreased by 0.02 for each additional year of mean disease duration using all trials, and by 0.04/year in the subgroup analysis (p<or=0.01 for both analyses, except for pain adjusted models at three months).

CONCLUSIONS

In individual trials, less improvement in the HAQ might be expected in late than in early rheumatoid arthritis. Comparison of changes in HAQ among rheumatoid arthritis trials should take into consideration the disease stage of the treated groups.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter, Controlled Clinical Trial of Cyclosporine Plus Chloroquine vs. Cyclosporine Plus Placebo in Early-Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis

BACKGROUND

Our objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of cyclosporine-A (CsA) plus chloroquine (Clq) in early-onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA) compared to CsA plus placebo.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, 12-month follow-up, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of CsA (2.5-5 mg/kg/day[d]) plus Clq (150 mg/d) vs. CsA plus placebo in active RA of <2 years of evolution.

RESULTS

A total of 149 patients were included; 111 patients (74.4%) completed the 12-month follow-up period. Evaluation at 6 and 12 months showed improvement for all clinical disease parameters. In both groups there was a decrease in tender joint count, swollen joint count, pain, assessment of efficacy by both investigator and patient, functional assessment, and morning stiffness, all differences statistically significant. With an intention-to-treat analysis, there was 64% in the CsA plus Clq group (CsA/Clq) and 63% in the CsA plus placebo group (CsA/Plac) at 12 months in the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)-20 criteria of improvement. Response rate for ACR-50 was 48 and 47%, and for ACR-70 it was 29% in both groups; the difference was not statistically significant between study groups. Gastrointestinal complaints were common in both groups. Four patients in CsA/Clq group and five patients in CsA/placebo group increased creatinine levels; two patients in each group discontinued treatment due to this reason.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no advantage to adding chloroquine to cyclosporine in patients with RA.

Combination therapy with disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis

There is increasing interest in using combinations of two or more disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs to treat rheumatoid arthritis. The use of such combinations is increasing in routine clinical practice. We have identified 18 well-conducted, randomised controlled trials of the use of combinations of disease modifying drugs, and a number of open studies that provide helpful supportive information. The 18 trials involved 2221 patients. Two trials reported strongly positive results, six reported moderately positive results and ten gave largely negative results. The combination of methotrexate, sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine appears to be effective with an acceptable level of adverse effects. There is also evidence that the combination of methotrexate and cyclosporin is advantageous. With both combinations, there appears to be further advantages from using corticosteroids in addition to the combination, although the evidence for this is incomplete. The use of other combinations is of less value, and in particular combinations involving parenteral gold, penicillamine and azathioprine are best avoided. Finally, there is growing evidence from randomised trials that the combination of anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) therapy with methotrexate is effective and well tolerated. We have identified four randomised controlled trials of the use of combinations of anti-TNF with methotrexate that all reported results favouring this combination. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of other combinations involving immunotherapies at the present time.

Discriminating ability of composite indices for measuring disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison of the Chronic Arthritis Systemic Index, Disease Activity Score and Thompson's articular index

OBJECTIVE

To compare the discriminating ability of the chronic arthritis systemic index (CASI), an index that uses the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) as the main variable, with the disease activity score (DAS) and Thompson's articular index (TAI) to detect high and low disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Two hundred and two RA patients were examined. According to criteria proposed previously, they were divided into two subgroups: those with active disease and those with low activity. The areas under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were employed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the CASI in comparison with the DAS and TAI for the discrimination of disease activity.

RESULTS

The difference between areas under the ROC curves of the CASI and TAI (0. 897+/-0.023 vs 0.780+/-0.032) and between the DAS and TAI (0.933+/-0. 018 vs 0.780+/-0.032) was highly significant (P=0.0001), thus reflecting the accuracy of the diagnostic assessment. No difference arose between areas under the ROC curves of the CASI and the DAS (difference between areas=0.036+/-0.022; P=0.103).

CONCLUSION

The CASI discriminates just as well between high and low disease activity as does the DAS. Either index consisting of more than one variable performs better than TAI. We conclude that even including the HAQ, a severity parameter in the long term, it is possible to construct an index that, at any time point, evaluates disease activity as well.

Therapy of rheumatoid arthritis: new developments and trends

The medical therapy of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been influenced strongly during the past decade by the recognition that many patients develop joint damage within the first year of disease. This observation has motivated rheumatologists to initiate disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) early in the disease course. This trend has been matched by the increased use of combination DMARD therapy, with the aim to maximize control of the signs and symptoms of RA and limit the development of joint damage. The results from controlled clinical trials generally have supported the concept that early, aggressive treatment with DMARDs is superior to less intensive strategies. In addition, certain DMARD combinations are more effective than the individual components of these regimens, but the evidence is strong for only a few DMARD combinations such as methotrexate and cyclosporine A. Three new drugs have been recently approved for the treatment of RA. Celecoxib, a selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, has similar clinical efficacy as conventional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and in short-term studies causes no more gastric and duodenal ulcers and erosions than patients treated with placebo. Treatment with leflunomide, an inhibitor of pyrimidine synthesis, has been shown in controlled clinical trials to produce significant clinical improvement in 50% to 60% of patients with RA and delay radiologic progression of disease. The era of biologic therapy has dawned with the apparent success of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha blockade using etanercept, a recombinant TNF receptor:Fc fusion protein, and infliximab, a chimeric anti-TNF monoclonal antibody. These new agents expand our treatment options in RA and should lead to innovative and more effective treatment approaches.

Management of therapy-resistant rheumatoid arthritis

During the last two decades, newly introduced therapeutic strategies have resulted in satisfactory modification of the disease course in the majority of the patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Nevertheless, a definite number of RA patients remain therapy-resistant, and for this group more aggressive treatment may be required for preventing permanent disability and progressive joint damage necessitating surgical procedures. Therefore, management of therapy-resistant RA is one of the major challenges in modern rheumatology. RA patients who have not responded to conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy are defined as refractory RA patients. However, a uniform description or definition for 'refractory' RA does not appear to be available. In this article we will deal with, and discuss, the term 'refractory RA' based on a MEDLINE database search using this term, currently available therapeutic options, data on therapy-resistant RA patients from an inception cohort of RA patients attending the Nijmegen University Hospital, management of extra-articular manifestations and future management strategies.