Treatment of relapsing polychondritis: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Due to the rarity of relapsing polychondritis (RP), no randomised clinical trial has been conducted to date and treatment remains empirical. We performed a systematic literature review to assess the efficacy of the main conventional immunosuppressants and biotherapies used in RP. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE for original articles without language restriction. Abstracts from American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) were also considered for inclusion. Observational studies and clinical trials reporting on the efficacy of conventional immunosuppressants and biotherapies in adult patients with RP were selected and pooled response rates for each treatment were computed. RESULTS: Of 304 articles and abstracts identified, 31 underwent full-text review, and 11 were included. The studies involved a total of 177 patients, exposed to a total of 247 lines of treatments. The main treatments studied (by number of lines) were: TNF inhibitors (TNFi), n=92; methotrexate (MTX), n=38; tocilizumab (TCZ), n=26; anakinra (ANA), n=21; rituximab (RTX), n=16; abatacept (ABT), n=14; cyclophosphamide (CYC), n=14; azathioprine (AZA), n=13. The pooled response rates across studies were: 72% [95% CI: 42-95] for ABT, 66% [95% CI: 49-82] for TCZ, 64% [95% CI: 53-74] for TNFi, 56% [95% CI: 37-73] for MTX, 47% [95% CI: 26-68] for ANA, 43% [95% CI: 20-68] for RTX. Based on more limited data, response rates for AZA and CYC ranged from 38 to 100% and from 25 to 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review of available evidence regarding the treatment of relapsing polychondritis, ABT, TCZ and TNFi were the drugs associated with the best outcomes. ABT efficacy must be interpreted in light of the small number of patients treated. While MTX had slightly less efficacy, it is one of the drugs for which data are the most robust.

The 2023 pipeline of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in clinical development for spondyloarthritis (including psoriatic arthritis): a systematic review of trials.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to provide an overview of current developments and potentially available therapeutic options for spondyloarthritis (SpA) in the coming years. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of 17 national and international clinical trial databases for all disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for SpA that are already marketed, in clinical development or withdrawn. The search was performed on February 2023 with the keywords "spondyloarthritis", "ankylosing spondylitis" and "psoriatic arthritis". For each molecule, we only considered the study at the most advanced stage of clinical development. RESULTS: Concerning axial SpA (axSpA), a total of 44 DMARDs were identified: 6 conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs), 27 biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) and 11 targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs). Among the 18 targeted treatments (b+tsDMARDs) in current development, corresponding trials reached phase I (n=1), II (n=10) and III (n=7). Ten molecules are IL-17 inhibitors, two Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and two granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor inhibitors; four have another mode of action. Concerning psoriatic arthritis (PsA), 44 DMARDs were identified: 5 csDMARDs, 27 bDMARDs and 12 tsDMARDs. Among the 15 molecules in current development, corresponding trials reached phase II (n=8) and III (n=7). Six molecules are JAK inhibitors, six IL-17 inhibitors and one an IL-23 inhibitor; two have another mode of action. CONCLUSION: This systematic review identified 18 and 15 molecules in clinical development for axSpA and PsA, respectively, which suggests a strengthening of the therapeutic arsenal in the coming years. However, with so many DMARDs but low target diversity, we will need to develop strategies or biomarkers to help clinicians make informed treatment decisions.