To taper or not to taper biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in axial spondyloarthritis anno 2023: That is the question

The 2022 ASAS-EULAR recommendations for the management of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) propose to consider dose reduction of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) for patients in sustained remission. However, this recommendation does not offer clear guidance for daily clinical practice. In this review, we analyze randomized clinical trials and real-world data on tapering and discontinuation of bDMARDs in patients with axSpA. We discuss the scientific rationale and benefits of tapering, identify advice to apply tapering in current practice, and delineate aspects to be investigated in future research.

Previous biological therapy and impairment of the IFN-γ/IL-10 axis are associated with low immune response to 17DD-YF vaccination in patients with spondyloarthritis

Yellow fever (YF) vaccination is known to induce a suboptimal response in patients with autoimmune diseases (AIDs). To date, few studies have focused on the performance of 17DD-YF vaccination in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA). In general, patients with SpA are young and have less comorbidities than other patients with AIDs, and frequently receive biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) that may impact their response to vaccines. Taking this background information, the present study aimed to investigate whether the use of biological DMARDs, even after planned washout, or disease activity measured by the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), would impact the overall performance of planned 17DD-YF primary vaccination in patients with SpA. For this purpose, 74 subjects were enrolled in a prospective study, including adult patients with SpA (SpA; n = 51) and a healthy control (HC; n = 23) group. Analysis of YF specific neutralizing antibodies test (PRNT), along with YF viremia and the levels of serum chemokines, cytokines, and growth factors were performed at distinct time points (D0, D3, D4, D5, D6, D7, D14, and D28). The BASDAI scores were evaluated at D0 and D180. Data demonstrated that overall, the SpA group presented lower PRNT titers and seropositivity rates as compared to the HC group (GeoMean = 112 vs. 440; 73% vs. 96%, respectively). In SpA subgroup analyses, previous biological DMARDs (BIO-IT) led to a lower PRNT titers (BIO-IT 79, 95% CI [39-150] vs. without biological DMARDs [non-BIO-IT] 159, 95% CI [94-267], p < 0.001). The non-BIO-IT group achieved a response similar to the HC group (81% vs. 96%, p = 0.112), whereas the BIO-IT group had a lower seroconversion rate (64% vs. 96% HC, p = 0.007). The BASDAI was not associated with PRNT levels and did not change after 6 months of follow-up. No differences in YF viremia were observed amongst subgroups. Higher baseline levels of serum biomarkers were observed in the BIO-IT group vs. the non-BIO-IT group, as well as in those with a BASDAI ≥ 4 vs. those with a BASDAI < 4. Increasing levels of several biomarkers were observed in SpA, especially in the BIO-IT and BASDAI ≥ 4 subgroups throughout the timeline kinetics, with impairment/disturbance in the IFN-γ/IL-10 axis around the peak of viremia (D5). Altogether, these findings suggested that the use of biological DMARDs impacts the response to the 17DD-YF vaccine, even after planned washout. Therefore, previous biological DMARD therapy, the inflammatory status prior vaccination, and impairment of the IFN-γ/IL-10 axis at the peak of viremia may determine the immunogenicity of 17DD-YF vaccination in patients with SpA.

Unincreased risk of hospitalized infection under targeted therapies versus methotrexate in elderly patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Infection is one of the primary concerns during treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in elderly patients. However, infection risk of patients with RA receiving targeted therapy (TT) including biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKIs) in elderly patients are scarce. The aim of this study was to compare the risk of hospitalized infection (HI) with TT versus methotrexate (MTX) therapy among young, elderly, and older elderly patients with RA.

Methods

Using Japanese claims data, patients satisfying the following criteria were enrolled: (1) ≥ one ICD10 code for RA; (2) ≥ one prescription of MTX or TT (bDMARDs and JAKIs) between April 2008 and September 2018; and (3) ≥16 years old. We calculated the incidence rate (IR) of HI per 100 patient-years in the young, elderly, and older elderly groups (those aged 16–64, 65–74, and ≥75 years, respectively) and the IR ratio (TT vs. MTX) of HI. A logistic regression model was used to estimate the associations between HI and TT versus MTX in each group.

Results

The overall IR of HI per 100 patient-years (95% confidence interval) was 3.2 [2.9–3.5], 5.0 [4.6–5.4], and 10.1 [9.5–10.9] in the young, elderly, and older elderly groups, respectively. Concomitant use of MTX or immunosuppressive DMARDs with TT was less frequent in the elderly and older elderly groups. The adjusted odds ratio of TT vs. MTX for HI was 1.3 (1.0–1.7; p = 0.021), 0.79 (0.61–1.0; p = 0.084), and 0.73 (0.56–0.94; p = 0.015) in the young, elderly, and older elderly groups, respectively.

Conclusion

The overall IR of HI was increased with age. The risk of HI under TT compared to MTX was not elevated in elderly and older elderly patients after adjusting for patients’ characteristics and concomitant treatments.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13075-022-02807-9.

The pharmacological and clinical aspects behind dose loading of biological disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in auto-immune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs): rationale and systematic narrative review of clinical evidence

Background

Dose loading of biological disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in auto-immune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) is performed to achieve steady state drug concentrations earlier after treatment start compared to dosing regimens without loading. Although loading inherently results in increased costs, treatment targets in terms of reduced disease activity may be achieved at an earlier state. It is an interesting topic that, surprisingly, has not received much attention in literature.

Methods

In this review, we aimed at providing a theoretical description of the pharmacodynamic / -kinetic rationale for dose loading of bDMARDs in AIRDs and to systematically review the clinical evidence on the effectiveness of dose loading on disease activity in AIRDs.

Results

Only a small number of studies (n = 5) has been published comparing the effectiveness of dose loading versus a regimen without dose loading of bDMARDs in AIRDs, addressing abatacept (n = 2), certolizumab pegol (n = 1), and secukinumab (n = 2). These studies provide insufficient evidence on superiority of dose loading in terms of disease activity compared to a dosing regimen without loading, while safety issues might be comparable.

Conclusions

Although dose loading is commonly adopted for several bDMARDs in AIRDs, scientific evidence on its effectiveness and safety is surprisingly scarce and does not suggest superiority compared to a regimen without dose loading. More research in this field, also with regard to the pharmaco-economic consequences of dose loading, is urgently needed.