Finite nucleos(t)ide analog therapy in HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B: an emerging paradigm shift

Potent nucleos(t)ide analogs (NUC), such as entecavir and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, are able to suppress HBV DNA to undetectable level. These agents have no direct action on cccDNA, which is a very stable template for HBV production, hence long-term or even life-long NUC therapy is required in HBeAg-negative patients to maintain HBV suppression and to achieve the ultimate goal of HBsAg loss. However, there are concerns of indefinite or life-long NUC therapy, including drug resistance, financial burden, adherence and willingness for indefinite long-term NUC therapy. Patients lost to follow-up and hence, not monitored may risk severe relapse that may deteriorate to hepatic decompensation or even hepatic failure. This Review integrated the cumulated evidence and assessed the strategy of finite NUC therapy in HBeAg-negative patients which was first tried in early 2000s. Earlier Asian findings that 2-year NUC therapy is feasible and safe have founded APASL stopping rule for patients on NUC therapy over 2-3 years since 2008. Subsequent studies have supported the strategy of finite NUC therapy, which has finally been accepted as an option by American and European liver associations since 2016. More recent studies have further shown greatly increased HBsAg loss rate (up to 5-year 39%) after stopping NUC therapy. The cumulated evidence has shown that the paradigm shift from indefinite long-term therapy to finite NUC therapy in HBeAg-negative patients is emerging. More studies are needed to fine-tuning the strategy including research for the optimal duration of consolidation therapy, timing to stop and to start re-treatment.

Head-to-head comparison of aggressive conventional therapy and three biological treatments and comparison of two de-escalation strategies in patients who respond to treatment: study protocol for a multicenter, randomized, open-label, blinded-assessor, phase 4 study

BACKGROUND

New targeted therapies and improved treatment strategies have dramatically improved the outcomes of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, it is unknown whether different early aggressive interventions can induce stable remission or a low-active disease state that can be maintained with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) therapy, and whether they differ in efficacy and safety. The Nordic Rheumatic Diseases Strategy Trials And Registries (NORD-STAR) study will assess and compare (1) the proportion of patients who achieve remission in a head-to-head comparison between csDMARD plus glucocorticoid therapy and three different biological DMARD (bDMARD) therapies with different modes of action and (2) two de-escalation strategies in patients who respond to first-line therapy.

METHODS/DESIGN

In a pragmatic, 80-160-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, assessor-blinded, phase 4 study, 800 patients with early RA (symptom duration less than 24 months) are randomized 1:1:1:1 to one of four different treatment arms: (1) aggressive csDMARD therapy with methotrexate + sulphasalazine + hydroxychloroquine + i.a. glucocorticoids (arm 1A) or methotrexate + prednisolone p.o. (arm 1B), (2) methotrexate + certolizumab-pegol, (3) methotrexate + abatacept, or (4) methotrexate + tocilizumab. The primary clinical endpoint is the proportion of patients reaching Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) remission at week 24. Patients in stable remission over 24 consecutive weeks enter part 2 of the study earliest after 48 weeks. Patients not achieving sustained CDAI remission over 24 consecutive weeks, exit the study after 80 weeks. In part 2, patients are re-randomized to two different de-escalation strategies, either immediate or delayed (after 24 weeks) tapering, followed by cessation of study medication. All patients remain on stable doses of methotrexate. The primary clinical endpoint in part 2 is the proportion of patients in remission (CDAI ≤2.8) 24 weeks after initiating treatment de-escalation. Radiographic assessment will be performed regularly throughout the trial, and blood and urine samples will be stored in a biobank for later biomarker analyses.

DISCUSSION

NORD-STAR is the first investigator-initiated, randomized, early RA trial to compare (1) csDMARD and three different bDMARD therapies head to head and (2) two different de-escalation strategies. The trial has the potential to identify which treatment strategy to apply in early RA to achieve the best possible outcomes for both patients and society.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01491815 and NCT02466581 . Registered on 8 December 2011 and May 2015, respectively. EudraCT: 2011-004720-35.

Prevalence and concordance of early and sustained remission assessed by various validated indices in the early arthritis "ESPOIR" cohort

OBJECTIVES

To assess the prevalence of remission in early arthritis, to evaluate the concordance across different criteria sets in defining this state, and to look for predictive factors for early and sustained remission.

METHODS

Patients from the ESPOIR cohort were followed-up every 6months. We analysed early remission and sustained remission in 3 groups of patients: patients having rheumatoid arthritis (RA) according to 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria, undifferentiated arthritis (UA), and the whole cohort. Remission was defined according to ACR/EULAR criteria, 28 Joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28<2.6), and Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI≤3.3). Agreement was evaluated by k-coefficient. Predictive factors for sustained remission at 1, 3 and 5year in RA patients were analyzed.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and nineteen patients were included. Early remission rates in the RA/UA/ESPOIR groups were observed in respectively 29.2% (181/682), 51.4% (55/123) and 32.7% (239/813) of patients by DAS28; 15.7%, 29.1% and 18% by SDAI; and 11.2%, 29.1% and 12.8% by ACR/EULAR criteria. Agreement between classifications of remission was low for DAS28 vs. ACR/EULAR (k=0.44), high for SDAI vs. ACR/EULAR (k=0.78), and moderate for SDAI vs. DAS28 (k=0.54). Lower baseline disease activity scores, non-menopausal status and younger age were the best predictive factors for sustained remission, with consistent results across the 3 definitions of remission.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that the rate of early and sustained remission in early arthritis is dependent on the definition used, with a variable degree of agreement across criteria sets, but with consistent predictive factors of favourable outcome in patients finally diagnosed with RA.

A phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sarilumab in patients with giant cell arteritis

BACKGROUND

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is primarily treated with glucocorticoids (GCs), which have substantial toxicity. Tocilizumab, an interleukin-6-receptor inhibitor (IL-6Ri), showed beneficial effects in GCA, leading to its approval. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of sarilumab (another IL-6Ri) in GCA.

METHODS

This Phase 3, double-blind study comprised a 52-week treatment period and a 24-week follow-up phase. Eligible GCA patients were randomized to receive sarilumab 200 mg (SAR200 + 26W) or 150 mg (SAR150 + 26W) with a 26-week GC taper, or placebo with a 52-week (PBO + 52W) or 26-week (PBO + 26W) GC taper. The primary efficacy endpoint was sustained remission (SR) at week 52. Additional endpoints were SR at week 24, cumulative GC dose, and safety. The study was discontinued prematurely due to protracted recruitment timelines, because of the impact of COVID-19. Therefore, only descriptive statistics were summarized.

RESULTS

Of the planned 360 subjects, only 83 were randomized and 36 were included in the week 52 analysis. At week 52, 46% (n = 6/13) of patients in SAR200 + 26W, 43% (n = 3/7) in SAR150 + 26W, 30% (n = 3/10) in PBO + 52W, and 0 (n = 0/6) in PBO + 26W taper groups achieved SR. Sensitivity analyses, excluding acute-phase reactants from the SR definition, showed similar results for SAR groups, but 60% (n = 6/10) in PBO + 52W and 17% (n = 1/6) in PBO + 26W taper groups achieved SR at week 52. Similar findings were noted at week 24. The proportions of patients who adhered to GC taper from week 12 through week 52 in each group were as follows: 46% (n = 6/13, SAR200 + 26W), 43% (n = 3/7, SAR150 + 26W), 60% (n = 6/10, PBO + 52W), and 33% (n = 2/6, PBO + 26W). The median actual cumulative GC dose received in the SAR200 + 26W group was lower than other groups. Most patients (80-100%) experienced treatment-emergent adverse events, with similar incidences reported across groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Owing to the small sample size due to the early termination, it is difficult to draw clear conclusions from this study. There were no unexpected safety findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03600805. Registered on July 26, 2018.

Tapering biologics in axial spondyloarthritis: A systematic literature review

INTRODUCTION

The emergence of biologics has improved the management of patients with rheumatic disease, mainly with spondyloarthritis (SpA). Sustained remission has become a reachable goal thanks to the treat to target strategy. Contrary to rheumatoid arthritis, data on biologic optimization among SpA patients in remission is scarce and still a subject of debate. The main objective of this systematic review was to provide the most up-to-date published literature regarding biologic tapering in axial spondyloarthritis.

METHODS

This systematic review followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews guidelines. Original articles from Pubmed and Scopus, published until December 20th 2021, and tackling tapering strategies of the biologics in patients with axial SpA were included RESULTS: Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. They were published between 2008 and 2020. The most studied molecules were Etanercept (ETN) (n = 13), Infliximab (IFX) (n = 6), Adalimumab (ADA) (n = 5), certolizumab pegol (CZP) (n = 2), Golimumab (n = 1) and ETN biosimilar. There are no studies published regarding anti-IL 17 tapering strategy. Patient-tailored dose reduction of anti TNF-α agents was successful in preserving stable low disease activity in most of the studies with remission rates ranging between 20.2 % and 93.7 %. Complete treatment discontinuation is associated with a high risk of flares.

CONCLUSION

To conclude, published data indicate that a progressive tapering strategy for anti TNF-α therapy is successful among axial SpA in sustained remission. However, further studies with more homogenized tapering strategies are needed in order to ascertain the specific implication of each subset for a better holistic approach.

Remission induction by Raising the dose of Remicade in RA (RRRR) study: Rationale and study protocol for a randomized controlled trial comparing for sustained clinical remission after discontinuation of infliximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Infliximab, an inhibitor of TNF-α, is one of the most widely used biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Recent studies indicated that baseline serum TNF-α could be considered as a key indicator for optimal dosing of infliximab for RA treatment to achieve the clinical response and its sustained remission. The Remission induction by Raising the dose of Remicade in RA (RRRR) study is an open-label, parallel group, multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare the proportions of clinical remission based on the simplified disease activity index (SDAI) after 1 year of treatment and its sustained remission rate after another 1 year between the investigational treatment strategy (for which the dose of infliximab was chosen based on the baseline serum TNF) and the standard strategy of 3 mg/kg per 8 weeks of infliximab administration in infliximab-naïve patients with RA showing an inadequate response to MTX. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients who kept discontinuation of infliximab 1 year after discontinued infliximab at the time of 54 weeks after the first administration of infliximab. The secondary endpoints are the proportion of clinical remission based on SDAI and changes in SDAI from baseline at each time point, other clinical parameters, quality of life measures and adverse events. Target sample size of randomized patients is 400 patients in total. The main results of the RRRR study are expected to be published at the end of 2017.

Predictors and the optimal duration of sustained remission in rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To determine predictors and optimal duration of sustained remission (SR) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

A total of 428 consecutive patients with RA visiting our clinic routinely between 2012 and 2013 were evaluated. Seventy seven of these patients in DAS28 remission were enrolled and followed up for 62.2 ± 9.9 months. Patients in remission ≥ 6 months (SR) and shorter (non: N-SR) were compared in terms of demographic-clinical data and the psychosocial factors. At enrollment, 1st and 5th years, patients in DAS28, SDAI, and Boolean remission were determined.

RESULTS

Sixty three patients were in SR and 14 in N-SR. Lower baseline DAS28 and HAQ scores, anti-CCP were positive predictors of SR. Although the presence of anxiety, depression, fibromyalgia, and fatigue were lower in the SR group, there was no significance. Patients in DAS28 remission (100%) at baseline reduced to 64% at 1st and 42.6% at 5th years. Patients satisfying SDAI and Boolean remission at these three visits were 49%, 44%, and 32.4% vs 41%, 28%, and 20.6%, respectively. If the duration of remission is defined as 6 months, the remission rates of SDAI at inclusion and fifth years' visits were similar but Boolean remission rates differed significantly and if it is accepted as ≥ 12 months, both the SDAI and Boolean remission rates were not different.

CONCLUSION

Low DAS28 and HAQ scores at baseline, anti-CCP were positive predictors of SR. Instead of 6 months, remission duration for ≥ 12 months would probably help us to predict SR independently from the chosen criteria; Boolean or SDAI.

Demographics and clinical characteristics associated with sustained remission and continuation of sustained remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with adalimumab

Background

Tumor necrosis factor inhibitor therapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients reduces disease activity, but little is known about the factors that correlate with continuation of remission. To identify demographics and clinical characteristics associated with achievement and continuation of sustained remission in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with adalimumab (ADA).

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, clinical outcome was retrospectively evaluated in RA patients that received ADA at a single institution using 28-joint disease activity score with erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR). Sustained remission was defined as DAS28-ESR < 2.6 for more than 6 months, and continuation of sustained remission was defined as DAS28-ESR < 2.6 that was maintained until the end of the observation period.

Results

Of 122 patients undergoing treatment with ADA between July 2008 and April 2014, 39 (32.0%) achieved sustained remission, and 22 of the 39 (56.4%) continued sustained remission until the end of the observation period (median, 20.5 months). Four of the 39 patients discontinued ADA because of remission, but 3 of these 4 patients restarted ADA because of RA flare. DAS28-ESR at the time of achievement of remission was lower in the subgroup of patients with continuation of sustained remission than the subgroup with RA flare.

Conclusion

Of 122 patients, 39 (32.0%) achieved remission that was sustained for more than 6 months and 22 of the 39 patients (56.4%) continued sustained remission until the end of the observation period. Continuation of sustained remission was correlated with DAS28-ESR at the time of achievement of remission.

A Case of Autoimmune Neutropenia That Responded to Rituximab

Autoimmune neutropenia (AIN) refers to the immune-mediated destruction of neutrophils. It is a rare condition with an estimated prevalence of less than 1 case per 100,000 per year. Typical treatment involves supportive care with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and management of secondary infections with antibiotics. Other therapies targeted at the immune system such as steroids, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and rituximab have not been thoroughly evaluated, but recently rituximab has shown promising results in one case series. We present a 76-year-old man with the diagnosis of antineutrophil antibody-negative AIN and concurrent immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), whose AIN was treated initially with G-CSF which had a short-lived effect, then treated with rituximab which induced a lasting remission. We then review this case in context of other cases described in the literature, given the paucity of available publications.

The trajectory of clinical responses in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis who achieve sustained remission in response to abatacept: subanalysis of AVERT-2, a randomized phase IIIb study

BACKGROUND

AVERT-2 (a phase IIIb, two-stage study) evaluated abatacept + methotrexate versus methotrexate alone, in methotrexate-naive, anti-citrullinated protein antibody-positive patients with early (≤ 6 months), active RA. This subanalysis investigated whether individual patients who achieved the week 24 Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) remission primary endpoint could sustain remission to 1 year and then maintain it following changes in therapy.

METHODS

During the 56-week induction period (IP), patients were randomized to weekly subcutaneous abatacept 125 mg + methotrexate or abatacept placebo + methotrexate. Patients completing the IP who achieved SDAI remission (≤ 3.3) at weeks 40 and 52 entered a 48-week de-escalation (DE) period. Patients treated with abatacept + methotrexate were re-randomized to continue weekly abatacept + methotrexate, or de-escalate and then withdraw abatacept (after 24 weeks), or receive abatacept monotherapy. Proportions of patients achieving sustained SDAI and Boolean remission, and Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using C-reactive protein (DAS28 [CRP]) < 2.6, were assessed. For patients achieving early sustained SDAI remission at weeks 24/40/52, flow between disease activity categories and individual trajectories was evaluated; flow was also evaluated for later remitters (weeks 40/52 but not week 24).

RESULTS

Among patients treated with abatacept + methotrexate (n/N = 451/752) at IP week 24, 22% achieved SDAI remission, 17% achieved Boolean remission, and 42% achieved DAS28 (CRP) < 2.6; of these, 56%, 58%, and 74%, respectively, sustained a response throughout IP weeks 40/52. Among patients with a sustained response at IP weeks 24/40/52, 82% (14/17) on weekly abatacept + methotrexate, 81% (13/16) on abatacept monotherapy, 63% (12/19) who de-escalated/withdrew abatacept, and 65% (11/17) on abatacept placebo + methotrexate were in SDAI remission at end of the DE period; rates were higher than for later remitters in all arms except abatacept placebo + methotrexate.

CONCLUSIONS

A high proportion of individual patients achieving clinical endpoints at IP week 24 with abatacept + methotrexate sustained their responses through week 52. Of patients achieving early and sustained SDAI remission through 52 weeks, numerically more maintained remission during the DE period if weekly abatacept treatment continued.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02504268 (ClinicalTrials.gov), registered July 21, 2015.

[Innovative strategies for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis]

Besides excellent guidelines and newly developed highly effective drugs, evidence-based strategic use of these new drugs has especially contributed to enormous advances in rheumatoid arthritis treatment, apparent especially since 2000. Currently, the treat-to-target (T2T) strategy has proven to be the most successful in several studies and systematic reviews. The target is to achieve remission, which should be reached and sustained for an optimal outcome (i.e. stable over a long time period). If the initial disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment fails, the best strategy for continuing treatment is controversial, with swap or switch being open to debate (change within a class of drugs or change in the mechanism of action). Recent studies seem to indicate that switching to another mechanism of action is the most successful approach. A hotly discussed topic is the question whether DMARD treatment can or should be tapered when sustained remission has been achieved? Many patients wish for a reduction of drugs in cases of stable remission; however, the stable disease control might become destabilized by tapering. The main priority is the reduction or tapering of glucocorticoid treatment. When the decision for reduction of DMARD treatment is made together with the patient, a complete cessation bears a high risk of a flare, therefore, a careful step by step reduction of DMARD treatment should be preferred. In the case of a running combination, the question whether the conventional DMARD (mostly methotrexate), the biological (b)DMARD or targeted synthetic (ts)DMARD should be reduced first, must be decided on an individual basis. Most patients prefer to first reduce methotrexate and transfer to a monotherapy.