E-selectin, interleukin 18, serum amyloid a, and matrix metalloproteinase 9 are associated with clinical response to golimumab plus methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite methotrexate therapy

Toward Overcoming Treatment Failure in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disorder characterized by inflammation and bone erosion. The exact mechanism of RA is still unknown, but various immune cytokines, signaling pathways and effector cells are involved. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are commonly used in RA treatment and classified into different categories. Nevertheless, RA treatment is based on a "trial-and-error" approach, and a substantial proportion of patients show failed therapy for each DMARD. Over the past decades, great efforts have been made to overcome treatment failure, including identification of biomarkers, exploration of the reasons for loss of efficacy, development of sequential or combinational DMARDs strategies and approval of new DMARDs. Here, we summarize these efforts, which would provide valuable insights for accurate RA clinical medication. While gratifying, researchers realize that these efforts are still far from enough to recommend specific DMARDs for individual patients. Precision medicine is an emerging medical model that proposes a highly individualized and tailored approach for disease management. In this review, we also discuss the potential of precision medicine for overcoming RA treatment failure, with the introduction of various cutting-edge technologies and big data.

Ratio of serum amyloid A to C-reactive protein is constant in the same patients but differs greatly between patients with inflammatory diseases

C-reactive protein (CRP) is commonly monitored to track the activity of inflammation and has become the gold standard in the management of all inflammatory diseases. Indeed, serum amyloid A (SAA) have seemed to correlate moderately with CRP, but the discrepancy of CRP and SAA levels has often been reported, especially in rheumatoid arthritis. Then, we examined CRP reflects a real magnitude of inflammation in patients with rheumatic and infectious inflammatory diseases. A total of 414 patients with infectious and non-infectious inflammatory diseases were enrolled. At initial visit, each patient underwent a clinical assessment and had also laboratory tests such as SAA and CRP. In each patient, we carried out a longitudinal analysis of CRP and SAA levels. We determined the inter-individual correlation between SAA and CRP and also clarified intra-individual changes of SAA/CRP ratio. SAA and CRP levels changed approximately linearly over time within individuals irrespective of rheumatic and infectious inflammatory diseases. However, SAA/CRP ratios differed dramatically between patients (from 0.117 to 50.8, median 5.71). In patients with high SAA/CRP ratio (>8.44), SAA is a better predictor of inflammation than CRP. In contrast, CRP is a better predictor in patients with low ratio (<3.52). Our results suggest that the SAA/CRP ratio differed greatly between individuals but was constant in intra-individuals. Low CRP levels could be accompanied by SAA levels predicting any degree of inflammation, implying that CRP is not reflecting a real magnitude of inflammation. To evaluate the real magnitude of inflammation, to access the SAA/CRP ratio in advance is essential.

Discrepancy Between SAA and CRP levels Linked to the Difference of SAA/CRP ratio in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVES

Indeed, serum amyloid A (SAA) and C-reactive protein (CRP) reportedly seem to have moderate correlation, but discrepancies between CRP and SAA levels have often been reported in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA). This study aimed to determine the reasons for this discrepancy.

METHODS

ERA patients (n = 206) were enrolled and treated with anti-RA drugs. Clinical features and disease activities were estimated. CRP and SAA levels were monitored, and the SAA/CRP ratio was compared. Correlations between CRP and SAA levels in individuals and between individuals, and disease activity scores were examined.

RESULTS

In a follow-up study, the SAA/CRP ratio remained almost constant over time in the same patients. However, SAA/CRP ratios differed widely between patients (0.233-106.3). In patients with high SAA/CRP ratio (>6.52), many (26.2%) had abnormal SAA values only. In patients with low SAA/CRP ratio (<6.52), not a few (6.8%) exhibited abnormal CRP values only.

CONCLUSIONS

The SAA/CRP ratio remained virtually constant in the same patients but differed dramatically between patients, which clarifies the discrepancy between CRP and SAA levels. CRP is the better marker in low-ratio patients, but not in high-ratio patients; the SAA/CRP ratio is critical for its interpretation.

Serum Amyloid A in Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases: A Compendious Review of a Renowned Biomarker

Serum amyloid A (SAA) is an acute phase protein with a significant importance for patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD). The central role of SAA in pathogenesis of IRD has been confirmed by recent discoveries, including its involvement in the activation of the inflammasome cascade and recruitment of interleukin 17 producing T helper cells. Clinical utility of SAA in IRD was originally evaluated nearly half a century ago. From the first findings, it was clear that SAA could be used for evaluating disease severity and monitoring disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and secondary amyloidosis. However, cost-effective and more easily applicable markers, such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), overwhelmed its use in clinical practice. In the light of emerging evidences, SAA has been discerned as a more sensitive biomarker in a wide spectrum of IRD, especially in case of subclinical inflammation. Furthermore, a growing number of studies are confirming the advantages of SAA over many other biomarkers in predicting and monitoring response to biological immunotherapy in IRD patients. Arising scientific discoveries regarding the role of SAA, as well as delineating SAA and its isoforms as the most sensitive biomarkers in various IRD by recently developing proteomic techniques are encouraging the revival of its clinical use. Finally, the most recent findings have shown that SAA is a biomarker of severe Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of this review is to discuss the SAA-involving immune system network with emphasis on mechanisms relevant for IRD, as well as usefulness of SAA as a biomarker in various IRD. Therefore, over a hundred original papers were collected through an extensive PubMed and Scopus databases search. These recently arising insights will hopefully lead to a better management of IRD patients and might even inspire the development of new therapeutic strategies with SAA as a target.

Pharmacodynamic Monitoring of Biological Therapies in Chronic Inflammatory Diseases

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, spondyloarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative colitis, and Crohn disease share similar underlying pathophysiological processes, providing the opportunity to treat the patients using similar biological therapies. Failure of biological treatments due to underexposure can be managed by therapeutic drug monitoring. Adjusting the treatment based on pharmacokinetic monitoring can be further improved by taking pharmacodynamic parameters such as clinical and molecular markers into account.

METHODS

Here, we critically evaluate the existing evidence, the hurdles to be taken, and the opportunities for a widespread implementation of pharmacodynamic monitoring.

RESULTS

Pharmacodynamic monitoring typically is the monitoring of biochemical markers. A pharmacodynamic marker preferably is specific for the pharmacological action of a drug, but most of the time nonspecific pharmacodynamic markers are used, such as C-reactive protein and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate. Clinical pharmacodynamic markers typically evaluate physical variables or symptoms. Although physician-reported outcomes have been studied for a longer time and often have been shown to correlate well with molecular pharmacodynamic markers and treatment outcomes, the introduction of mobile health or mHealth technologies caused a shift toward patient-reported outcomes, with the associated challenge to consistently reflect the inflammatory state, thereby preventing undertreatment or unnecessary overdosing of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The primary goal of pharmacodynamic monitoring is to optimize the response, but it can also have an impact on safety, costs, patient adherence, etc. Ideally, the constant remote monitoring of patient-reported disease activity is expected to become the standard, facilitated by mHealth technologies.

The effect of anti-IL-6 receptor antibody for the treatment of McH-lpr/lpr-RA1 mice that spontaneously developed destructive arthritis and enthesitis

Background

McH-lpr/lpr-RA1 mice are a new strain of mice which spontaneously develop destructive arthritis and enthesitis in the ankle. There is no published data that drug treatment has been trialed on these mice. This study examined the effect of the mouse anti-IL-6 receptor antibody, MR16–1, for the treatment of arthritis and enthesitis in McH-lpr/lpr-RA1 mice.

Methods

Male McH-lpr/lpr-RA1 mice were randomly divided into control and treatment groups. MR16–1 was administered from 10 weeks of age for the treatment group. Saline was applied for the control group. The drug was administered once a week, at an initial dose of 2 mg, then maintained at 0.5 mg once per week thereafter. The effects were evaluated by the histopathological synovitis score, in vivo imaging using indocyanine green liposomes, and analysis of the gene expression of inflammatory cytokines.

Results

Tissue analyses were carried out at 14, 17 and 20 weeks of age. The synovitis scores of treated groups were significantly lower compared with those of the control group at 14 and 17 weeks of age. The kappa coefficient was 0.77. However, progression of entheseal ossification persisted in the MR16–1 treated group. In vivo imaging using indocyanine green liposomes showed significant decreases in signal intensities of treated groups at week 14, but no significant differences were observed at week 18. Blood serum amyloid A levels in treated groups were significantly lower at 17 weeks of age. The gene expression levels of Tnf and Il17 were also significantly lower in MR16–1 treated groups.

Conclusions

Administration of the anti-IL-6 receptor antibody is effective for the treatment of synovitis and bone destruction of McH-lpr/lpr-RA1 mice. McH-lpr/lpr-RA1 mice may be a suitable experimental model for the development of new treatments for destructive arthritis and enthesitis. IL-6 signal blockade could contribute to the treatment of destructive arthritis, and further studies should be carried out to confirm its potential in the prevention of enthesopathy developed to ossification.

Proteomic Analysis of Serum Amyloid A as a Potential Marker in Intestinal Behçet's Disease

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Data regarding biomarkers to understand disease pathogenesis and to assess disease activity of intestinal Behçet's disease (BD) are limited. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the differentially expressed proteins in sera from patients with intestinal BD and to search for biomarkers using mass spectrometry-based proteomic analysis.

METHODS

Serum samples were pooled for the screening study, and two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE) was performed to characterize the proteins present in intestinal BD patients. Candidate protein spots were identified using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization tandem time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF/TOF MS) and bioinformatic analysis. To validate the proteomic results, serum samples from an independent cohort were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

Pooled serum samples were used for 2-DE, and approximately 400 protein spots were detected in the sera of intestinal BD patients. Of the 22 differentially expressed proteins, 3 were successfully identified using MALDI-TOF/TOF MS. The three up-regulated proteins identified in the intestinal BD group included fibrin, apolipoprotein A-IV, and serum amyloid A (SAA). Serum SAA in intestinal BD patients (2.76 ± 2.50 ng/ml) was significantly higher than that in controls (1.68 ± 0.90 ng/ml, p = 0.007), which is consistent with the proteomic results. In addition, the level of IL-1β in patients with intestinal BD (8.96 ± 1.23 pg/ml) was higher than that in controls (5.40 ± 0.15 pg/ml, p = 0.009). SAA released by HT-29 cells was markedly increased by tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and lipopolysaccharides stimulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our proteomic analysis revealed that SAA was up-regulated in intestinal BD patients.

Exosomal amyloid A and lymphatic vessel endothelial hyaluronic acid receptor-1 proteins are associated with disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis

Background

Exosomes are thought to play an important role in exchanging information between cells. The proteins and lipids in exosomes play roles in mediating inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The aim of this study was to identify exosomal candidate proteins that are related to other inflammatory parameters in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

The study population consisted of 60 patients with RA: 30 in the clinical remission (CR) group with a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints based on erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) ≤2.6 and 30 in the non-clinical remission (non-CR) group with a DAS28-ESR >2.6. Preparation of exosomes from patient serum samples was performed with the ExoQuick kit, and protein identification/quantification was performed using tandem mass tag labeling/mass spectrometry and an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Comparisons between groups were made using Student’s t test or the Mann-Whitney U test, as appropriate. Spearman’s correlation coefficients (ρ) were calculated.

Results

We identified six candidate proteins. Exosomal levels of amyloid A (AA) and lymphatic vessel endothelial hyaluronic acid receptor-1 (LYVE-1) differed between the CR and non-CR groups. Both serum and exosomal AA levels were higher in the non-CR group than in the CR group (p = 0.001). Significant positive correlations were found between exosomal AA and C-reactive protein (CRP) as well as between serum AA and CRP (ρ = 0.614, p = 0.001, and ρ = 0.624, p = 0.001, respectively). Although serum levels of LYVE-1 did not differ between the non-CR and CR groups, exosomal levels of LYVE-1 were lower in the non-CR group than in the CR group (p = 0.01). We identified positive correlations between serum/exosomal LYVE-1 and CRP only in the non-CR group (serum ρ = 0.376, p = 0.04; exosome ρ = 0.545, p = 0.002).

Conclusions

Exosomal LYVE-1 shows potential for use as an additional marker of disease activity in patients with RA, and exosomes may carry other useful markers for RA.

Differential response of serum amyloid A to different therapies in early rheumatoid arthritis and its potential value as a disease activity biomarker

Background

The aim was to compare the effect of etanercept (ETN) and conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy on serum amyloid A (SAA) levels and to determine whether SAA reflects rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity better than C-reactive protein (CRP).

Methods

We measured SAA and CRP at baseline, 24, 48, and 102 week follow-up visits in 594 patients participating in the Treatment of early RA (TEAR) study. We used Spearman correlation coefficients (rho) to evaluate the relationship between SAA and CRP and mixed effects models to determine whether ETN and methotrexate (MTX) treatment compared to triple DMARD therapy differentially lowered SAA. Akaike information criteria (AIC) were used to determine model fits.

Results

SAA levels were only moderately correlated with CRP levels (rho = 0.58, p < 0.0001). There were significant differences in SAA by both visit (p = 0.0197) and treatment arm (p = 0.0130). RA patients treated with ETN plus MTX had a larger reduction in SAA than patients treated with traditional DMARD therapy. Similar results were found for serum CRP by visit (p = 0.0254) and by treatment (p < 0.0001), with a more pronounced difference than for SAA. Across all patients and time points, models of the disease activity score of 28 joints (DAS28)-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) using SAA levels were better than models using CRP; the ΔAIC between the SAA and CRP models was 305.

Conclusions

SAA may be a better biomarker of RA disease activity than CRP, especially during treatment with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists. This warrants additional studies in other cohorts of patients on treatment for RA.

Trial registration

(ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00259610, Date of registration: 28 November 2005)

The comparative safety of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis update of 44 trials

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to evaluate and update the safety data from randomized controlled trials of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in patients treated for rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted from 1990 to May 2013. All studies included were randomized, double-blind, controlled trials of patients with rheumatoid arthritis that evaluated adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, or infliximab treatment. The serious adverse events and discontinuation rates were abstracted, and risk estimates were calculated by Peto odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

Forty-four randomized controlled trials involving 11,700 subjects receiving tumor necrosis factor inhibitors and 5901 subjects receiving placebo or traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were included. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitor treatment as a group was associated with a higher risk of serious infection (OR, 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.78) and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.06-1.43) compared with placebo and traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug treatments. Specifically, patients taking adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, and infliximab had an increased risk of serious infection (OR, 1.69, 1.98, and 1.63, respectively) and showed an increased risk of discontinuation due to adverse events (OR, 1.38, 1.67, and 2.04, respectively). In contrast, patients taking etanercept had a decreased risk of discontinuation due to adverse events (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93). Although ORs for malignancy varied across the different tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, none reached statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

These meta-analysis updates of the comparative safety of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors suggest a higher risk of serious infection associated with adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, and infliximab, which seems to contribute to higher rates of discontinuation. In contrast, etanercept use showed a lower rate of discontinuation. These data may help guide clinical comparative decision making in the management of rheumatoid arthritis.

Correlations of SELE genetic polymorphisms with risk of coronary heart disease and myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis

This meta-analysis of case-control studies was conducted to determine whether SELE genetic polymorphisms contribute to the pathogenesis of coronary heart disease (CHD) and myocardial infarction (MI). The PubMed, CISCOM, CINAHL, Web of Science, Google Scholar, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, and CBM databases were searched for relevant articles published before November 1st, 2013 without any language restrictions. Meta-analysis was conducted using the STATA 12.0 software. Twenty case-control studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 2,292 CHD patients, 901 MI patients and 3,233 healthy controls. Six common polymorphisms in the SELE gene were evaluated, including 554L/F, 98G/T, 128S/R, 2692G/A, 1901C/T, and 1856A/G. The results of our meta-analysis suggest that SELE genetic polymorphisms might be strongly correlated with an increased risk of CHD (allele model: OR 2.08, 95% CI 1.67-2.58, P<0.001; dominant model: OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.68-2.68, P<0.001; respectively), especially the SELE 554L/F, 98G/T and 128S/R polymorphisms. Furthermore, our findings indicated that SELE genetic polymorphisms were closely linked to the risk of CHD in Asians but not Caucasians. However, our findings reveal no positive correlations between SELE genetic polymorphisms and MI risk (allele model: OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.00-1.94, P=0.054; dominant model: OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.96-2.04, P=0.081; respectively). The current meta-analysis suggests that SELE genetic polymorphisms may contribute to an increased risk of CHD, especially the SELE 554L/F, 98G/T and 128S/R polymorphisms in Asians. However, SELE genetic polymorphisms may not be important determinants of susceptibility to MI.

Systemic inflammatory profile and response to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by progressive worsening of airflow limitation associated with abnormally inflamed airways in older smokers. Despite correlative evidence for a role for tumor necrosis factor-alpha in the pathogenesis of COPD, the anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha, infliximab did not show clinical efficacy in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II clinical trial. This study sought to evaluate the systemic inflammatory profile associated with COPD and to assess the impact of tumor necrosis factor neutralization on systemic inflammation.

Methods

Serum samples (n = 234) from the phase II trial were collected at baseline and after 24 weeks of placebo or infliximab. Additionally, baseline serum samples were obtained from an independent COPD cohort (n = 160) and 2 healthy control cohorts (n = 50; n = 109). Serum concentrations of a broad panel of inflammation-associated analytes were measured using a 92-analyte multiplex assay.

Results

Twenty-five proteins were significantly elevated and 2 were decreased in COPD, including highly elevated CD40 ligand, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, epidermal growth factor, acute-phase proteins, and neutrophil-associated proteins. This profile was largely independent of smoking status, age, and clinical phenotype. The majority of these associations of serum analytes with COPD are novel findings. Increased serum creatine kinase-muscle/brain and myoglobin correlated modestly with decreased forced expiratory volume at 1 second, suggesting cardiac involvement. Infliximab did not affect this systemic inflammatory profile.

Conclusions

A robust systemic inflammatory profile was associated with COPD. This profile was generally independent of disease severity. Because anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha did not influence systemic inflammation, how to control the underlying pathology beyond symptom suppression remains unclear.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, No.: NCT00056264.

Golimumab: a new anti-TNF-alpha agent for rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory systemic disease characterized by symmetric arthritis leading to progressive erosion of cartilage and bone. Psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis are also inflammatory arthritides that belong to the spondyloarthritides. Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and biologic therapies including anti-TNF agents are used in their treatment. The TNF antagonists have shown rapid and sustained therapeutic responses. However, a substantial number of patients fail to respond to anti-TNF agents or experience side effects. Golimumab is a human monoclonal antibody to TNF-α requiring less frequent administration compared with current anti-TNF products. Various trials have shown promising results in terms of efficacy and safety in methotrexate-naive and -resistant patients with RA as well as in patients previously treated with other anti-TNF agents. The efficacy of golimumab has also been demonstrated in patients with psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis.

Golimumab: Review of the efficacy and tolerability of a recently approved tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitor

BACKGROUND

Golimumab (GLM) is a tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) inhibitor that was approved in the United States in 2009 for use with methotrexate (MTX) in adults with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and with or without MTX or other non-biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in adults with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or active ankylosing spondylitis (AS). GLM is administered as a 50-mg subcutaneous injection once a month.

OBJECTIVES

The goals of this article were to review the current literature on GLM and to provide recommendations for the use of GLM based on the published information.

METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and other databases, as well as the Web sites for the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the European Union League Against Rheumatism, were searched for relevant articles published in English between the inception of the databases through April 2010. Search terms included golimumab and CNTO 148. Pharmacologic, pharmacokinetic, clinical, outcomes, and economic studies as well as meta-analyses, case reports, and select abstracts were eligible for inclusion. Review articles on GLM were not used except to identify other primary papers.

RESULTS

Seven clinical studies were identified and used to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of GLM: 5 in patients with RA (4 subcutaneous administration and 1 intravenous administration), 1 in patients with PsA (subcutaneous), and 1 in patients with AS (subcutaneous). In MTX-naive patients with RA, the number of patients satisfying the ACR20 response criteria (>20% improvement in ACR response rate) at 24 weeks was significantly higher for the GLM + MTX groups than for the MTX-only groups (62% vs 49%, respectively; P < 0.05). In patients with active RA despite MTX therapy, ACR20 responses at 14 to 16 weeks were significantly higher for the combined GLM + MTX groups than for the MTX groups (50%-79% vs 33%-37%, respectively; P < 0.001). GLM was more effective than placebo, both with and without MTX, in patients with RA and a history of treatment with 1 or 2 TNF-α inhibitors (ACR20 at 14 weeks, 35%-37% vs 18%, respectively; P < 0.001). Studies of other TNF-α inhibitors reported ACR20 responses in 53% to 59% of patients with active RA at 24 weeks. GLM was also more effective than placebo at 24 weeks in patients with PsA (ACR20, 52%-61% vs 12%, respectively; P < 0.001) (ASAS40 [40% improvement based on Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis International Working Group criteria], 44%-54% vs 15%, respectively; P < 0.001). Studies of other TNF-α inhibitors reported ACR20 responses at 24 weeks in 55% to 57% of patients with PsA and ASAS40 responses in 46% to 47% of patients with AS. The incidence of any adverse effect appeared to be comparable in the GLM (61.2%-93.9%) and placebo groups (59.3%-85.3%), but withdrawals because of adverse effects were higher in the GLM groups (0%-12.1%) than in the placebo groups (0%-5.9%). The incidence of serious infections was comparable for GLM (0%-4.4%) and placebo (0.8%-3.5%). The most frequently reported adverse effects in the GLM groups were injection-site reactions (2.7%-37.1%), nausea (2.7%-22.9%), headache (3.8%-21.2%), nasopharyngitis (1.9%-15.0%), and upper respiratory tract infections (5.7%-13.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of the studies included in this review, GLM appeared to be more effective than placebo in patients with RA, PsA, or AS. Clinical studies have not directly compared GLM with other TNF-α inhibitors. However, according to the available efficacy and tolerability data, GLM should be considered as the first or second TNF-α inhibitor for the treatment of PsA or AS and as the second or possibly first TNF-α inhibitor in combination with MTX for the treatment of RA.

Golimumab - a new tool in the armoury against inflammatory arthritis

The development of biological drugs blocking tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) has had a dramatic impact on the treatment of inflammatory arthritis in recent years. Golimumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody which inhibits TNF-α. It is licensed for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis. In this review we evaluate the results of phase III studies using golimumab and explore the place of golimumab in the treatment of these diseases.

Association of serum markers with improvement in clinical response measures after treatment with golimumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite receiving methotrexate: results from the GO-FORWARD study

Introduction

The goal of this study was to identify serum markers that are modulated by treatment with golimumab with or without methotrexate (MTX) and are associated with clinical response.

Methods

Sera were collected at weeks 0 and 4 from a total of 336 patients (training dataset, n = 100; test dataset, n = 236) from the GO-FORWARD study of patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite MTX. Patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo plus MTX; golimumab, 100 mg plus placebo; golimumab, 50 mg plus MTX; or golimumab, 100 mg plus MTX. Subcutaneous injections were administered every 4 weeks. Samples were tested for select inflammatory, bone, and cartilage markers and for protein profiling using multianalyte profiles.

Results

Treatment with golimumab with or without MTX resulted in significant decreases in a variety of serum proteins at week 4 as compared with placebo plus MTX. The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20, ACR 50, and Disease Activity Score (DAS) 28 responders showed a distinct biomarker profile compared with nonresponding patients.

Conclusions

ACR 20 and ACR 50 responders among the golimumab/golimumab + MTX-treated patients had a distinct change from baseline to week 4 in serum protein profile as compared with nonresponders. Some of these changed markers were also associated with multiple clinical response measures and improvement in outcome measures in golimumab/golimumab + MTX-treated patients. Although the positive and negative predictive values of the panel of markers were modest, they were stronger than C-reactive protein alone in predicting clinical response to golimumab.

Trial registration

http://ClinicalTrials.gov identification number: NCT00264550.

Urine Peptidomic and Targeted Plasma Protein Analyses in the Diagnosis and Monitoring of Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

PURPOSE: Systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis is a chronic pediatric disease. The initial clinical presentation can mimic other pediatric inflammatory conditions, which often leads to significant delays in diagnosis and appropriate therapy. SJIA biomarker development is an unmet diagnostic/prognostic need to prevent disease complications. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We profiled the urine peptidome to analyze a set of 102 urine samples, from patients with SJIA, Kawasaki disease (KD), febrile illnesses (FI), and healthy controls. A set of 91 plasma samples, from SJIA flare and quiescent patients, were profiled using a customized antibody array against 43 proteins known to be involved in inflammatory and protein catabolic processes. RESULTS: We identified a 17-urine-peptide biomarker panel that could effectively discriminate SJIA patients at active, quiescent, and remission disease states, and patients with active SJIA from confounding conditions including KD and FI. Targeted sequencing of these peptides revealed that they fall into several tight clusters from seven different proteins, suggesting disease-specific proteolytic activities. The antibody array plasma profiling identified an SJIA plasma flare signature consisting of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 (TIMP1), interleukin (IL)-18, regulated upon activation, normal T cell expressed and secreted (RANTES), P-Selectin, MMP9, and L-Selectin. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The urine peptidomic and plasma protein analyses have the potential to improve SJIA care and suggest that SJIA urine peptide biomarkers may be an outcome of inflammation-driven effects on catabolic pathways operating at multiple sites. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12014-010-9058-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Clinical application and evaluation of anti-TNF-alpha agents for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic progressive autoimmune disease that dramatically impairs quality of life. A number of compounds are available to treat RA, but they vary in effectiveness. Thus, no optimal treatment strategy has been defined. Currently, disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (anti-TNF-alpha) agents are considered the treatments of choice. For patients with inadequate responses to DMARD therapy, one recommended therapeutic alternative is anti-TNF-alpha therapy. Anti-TNF-alpha agents are effective and have rapid onset of action compared with DMARDs. Elucidating the differences in effectiveness of anti-TNF-alpha compounds has important clinical implications. By comparing the efficacy, safety and use principle of different treatment options, this review focuses on providing important information about three anti-TNF-alpha compounds (etanercept, infliximab, and adalimumab) to help define optimal treatments for RA patients.

Serum IL-18 and IL-18BP levels in patients with Chikungunya virus infection

Chikungunya virus infection has recently emerged in several countries. The inflammatory response is suggested to be involved in the pathology observed in this infectious disease. Interleukin-18 (IL-18) is an inducer of interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) production and has been shown to play a role in several inflammatory diseases. IL-18 binding protein (IL-18BP) is a natural regulator of IL-18. In this study, we determined the levels of IL-18 and IL-18BP in patients with Chikungunya virus infection. Acute and convalescent sera were collected from each patient. The levels of both IL-18 and IL-18BP were measured by ELISA assays. IL-18 and IL-18BP levels were higher in patients than in controls. In addition, the level of IL-18 was higher in convalescent than in acute sera. However, the level of IL-18BP was lower in convalescent than in acute sera. These data suggest that production of both IL-18 and IL-18BP was induced following Chikungunya virus infection. IL-18BP was increased to regulate the activity of IL-18. The ratio of IL-18 to IL-18BP was higher in convalescent than in acute sera. The lower level of IL-18BP in convalescent sera was probably due to loss following IL-18 neutralization. Our data suggest that Chikungunya virus infection promotes the T helper-1 (Th-1) response by inducing IL-18 production. Manipulation of IL-18 and IL-18BP levels could be a promising therapeutic approach to alleviate symptoms in patients with Chikungunya virus infection.

Golimumab: A Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha Inhibitor for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To review the pharmacologic, pharmacokinetic, efficacy, and safety data of golimumab, an anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) monoclonal antibody.

DATA SOURCES

A search of MEDLINE (1950-September 2009) was performed to identify any published clinical trials or review articles pertaining to golimumab. Key search terms included golimumab, rheumatoid arthritis, CNTO 148, and anti-TNF-α inhibitors. Bibliographies of selected articles were reviewed to identify other relevant citations. Abstracts from national and international meetings and information from the manufacturer were also reviewed.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All available published articles and abstracts describing golimumab's pharmacologic or pharmacokinetic profile, efficacy, and safety were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Golimumab is a fully humanized TNF-α monoclonal antibody that is specific for human TNF-α. Trials have investigated the use of golimumab in patients who have rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and are on methotrexate, are methotrexate-naïve, and have previously tried TNF-α inhibition therapy. When used in combination with methotrexate or another disease-modifying antirheumatic drug, golimumab therapy results in improvements of clinical outcomes including the American College of Rheumatology parameters in all of the aforementioned populations. Although multiple doses and dosing regimens have been studied, the Food and Drug Administration-approved dose is 50 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks. The most common adverse effects include injection site erythema, headaches, and nausea. There were a limited number of incidences of serious infection or malignancy.

CONCLUSIONS

With 4 TNF-α monoclonal antibodies currently on the market, it is unclear what golimumab's place in therapy for RA will be. Some benefits include monthly injections, proven efficacy after previous TNF-α inhibitor therapy, and limited antibody development during therapy. However, with a lack of longer-term trials assessing efficacy and safety compared with other TNF-α inhibitors, golimumab should be reserved for use after other therapies fail.

Golimumab

Golimumab, a human anti-TNFalpha IgG1kappa monoclonal antibody, was approved in the US and Canada in April 2009 as a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis, and is undergoing regulatory review in the EU for these indications. The product was developed by Centocor and Janssen Pharmaceutical KK (Johnson & Johnson subsidiaries), in collaboration with Schering-Plough and Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma. Golimumab faces numerous protein therapeutic competitors on the market, but, as the first patient-administered, once-monthly dosed anti-TNFalpha drug, it will likely be an attractive option for patients.