Publisher Correction: The immune cell landscape in kidneys of patients with lupus nephritis.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

The immune cell landscape in kidneys of patients with lupus nephritis.

Lupus nephritis is a potentially fatal autoimmune disease for which the current treatment is ineffective and often toxic. To develop mechanistic hypotheses of disease, we analyzed kidney samples from patients with lupus nephritis and from healthy control subjects using single-cell RNA sequencing. Our analysis revealed 21 subsets of leukocytes active in disease, including multiple populations of myeloid cells, T cells, natural killer cells and B cells that demonstrated both pro-inflammatory responses and inflammation-resolving responses. We found evidence of local activation of B cells correlated with an age-associated B-cell signature and evidence of progressive stages of monocyte differentiation within the kidney. A clear interferon response was observed in most cells. Two chemokine receptors, CXCR4 and CX3CR1, were broadly expressed, implying a potentially central role in cell trafficking. Gene expression of immune cells in urine and kidney was highly correlated, which would suggest that urine might serve as a surrogate for kidney biopsies.

Trial of Anti-BDCA2 Antibody Litifilimab for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

BACKGROUND: Antibody-binding of blood dendritic cell antigen 2 (BDCA2), which is expressed exclusively on plasmacytoid dendritic cells, suppresses the production of type I interferon that is involved in the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The safety and efficacy of subcutaneous litifilimab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to BDCA2, in patients with SLE have not been extensively studied. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2 trial of litifilimab involving participants with SLE. The initial trial design called for randomly assigning participants to receive litifilimab (at a dose of 50, 150, or 450 mg) or placebo administered subcutaneously at weeks 0, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20, with the primary end point of evaluating cutaneous lupus activity. The trial design was subsequently modified; adults with SLE, arthritis, and active skin disease were randomly assigned to receive either litifilimab at a dose of 450 mg or placebo. The revised primary end point was the change from baseline in the total number of active joints (defined as the sum of the swollen joints and the tender joints) at week 24. Secondary end points were changes in cutaneous and global disease activity. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 334 adults were assessed for eligibility, and 132 underwent randomization (64 were assigned to receive 450-mg litifilimab, 6 to receive 150-mg litifilimab, 6 to receive 50-mg litifilimab, and 56 to receive placebo). The primary analysis was conducted in the 102 participants who had received 450-mg litifilimab or placebo and had at least four tender and at least four swollen joints. The mean (±SD) baseline number of active joints was 19.0±8.4 in the litifilimab group and 21.6±8.5 in the placebo group. The least-squares mean (±SE) change from baseline to week 24 in the total number of active joints was -15.0±1.2 with litifilimab and -11.6±1.3 with placebo (mean difference, -3.4; 95% confidence interval, -6.7 to -0.2; P = 0.04). Most of the secondary end points did not support the results of the analysis of the primary end point. Receipt of litifilimab was associated with adverse events, including two cases of herpes zoster and one case of herpes keratitis. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 trial involving participants with SLE, litifilimab was associated with a greater reduction from baseline in the number of swollen and tender joints than placebo over a period of 24 weeks. Longer and larger trials are required to determine the safety and efficacy of litifilimab for the treatment of SLE. (Funded by Biogen; LILAC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02847598.).

Trial of Anti-BDCA2 Antibody Litifilimab for Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus.

BACKGROUND: Blood dendritic cell antigen 2 (BDCA2) is a receptor that is exclusively expressed on plasmacytoid dendritic cells, which are implicated in the pathogenesis of lupus erythematosus. Whether treatment with litifilimab, a humanized monoclonal antibody against BDCA2, would be efficacious in reducing disease activity in patients with cutaneous lupus erythematosus has not been extensively studied. METHODS: In this phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned adults with histologically confirmed cutaneous lupus erythematosus with or without systemic manifestations in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous litifilimab (at a dose of 50, 150, or 450 mg) or placebo at weeks 0, 2, 4, 8, and 12. We used a dose-response model to assess whether there was a response across the four groups on the basis of the primary end point, which was the percent change from baseline to 16 weeks in the Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index-Activity score (CLASI-A; scores range from 0 to 70, with higher scores indicating more widespread or severe skin involvement). Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 132 participants were enrolled; 26 were assigned to the 50-mg litifilimab group, 25 to the 150-mg litifilimab group, 48 to the 450-mg litifilimab group, and 33 to the placebo group. Mean CLASI-A scores for the groups at baseline were 15.2, 18.4, 16.5, and 16.5, respectively. The difference from placebo in the change from baseline in CLASI-A score at week 16 was -24.3 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] -43.7 to -4.9) in the 50-mg litifilimab group, -33.4 percentage points (95% CI, -52.7 to -14.1) in the 150-mg group, and -28.0 percentage points (95% CI, -44.6 to -11.4) in the 450-mg group. The least squares mean changes were used in the primary analysis of a best-fitting dose-response model across the three drug-dose levels and placebo, which showed a significant effect. Most of the secondary end points did not support the results of the primary analysis. Litifilimab was associated with three cases each of hypersensitivity and oral herpes infection and one case of herpes zoster infection. One case of herpes zoster meningitis occurred 4 months after the participant received the last dose of litifilimab. CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 trial involving participants with cutaneous lupus erythematosus, treatment with litifilimab was superior to placebo with regard to a measure of skin disease activity over a period of 16 weeks. Larger and longer trials are needed to determine the effect and safety of litifilimab for the treatment of cutaneous lupus erythematosus. (Funded by Biogen; LILAC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02847598.).

Baricitinib for systemic lupus erythematosus: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (SLE-BRAVE-II).

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib is an oral selective inhibitor of Janus kinase 1 and 2 approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, atopic dermatitis, and alopecia areata. In a 24-week phase 2 study in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), baricitinib 4 mg significantly improved SLE disease activity compared with placebo. In this Article, we report the evaluation of efficacy and safety of baricitinib in patients with SLE in a 52-week phase 3 study. METHODS: In this phase 3 double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study, SLE-BRAVE-II, patients (aged ≥18 years) with active SLE receiving stable background therapy were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to baricitinib 4 mg, baricitinib 2 mg, or placebo once daily for 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with an SLE Responder Index (SRI)-4 response at week 52 in the baricitinib 4 mg treatment group compared with placebo. Glucocorticoid tapering was encouraged but not required per protocol. The primary endpoint was assessed by logistic regression analysis with baseline disease activity, baseline corticosteroid dose, region, and treatment group in the model. Efficacy analyses were done on an intention-to-treat population, comprising all participants who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of investigational product and who did not discontinue from the study for the reason of lost to follow-up at the first post-baseline visit. Safety analyses were done on all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of investigational product and who did not discontinue. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03616964, and is complete. FINDINGS: A total of 775 patients were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of baricitinib 4 mg (n=258), baricitinib 2 mg (n=261), or placebo (n=256). There was no difference in the primary efficacy outcome of the proportion of SRI-4 responders at week 52 between participants who received baricitinib 4mg (121 [47%]; odds ratio 1·07 [95% CI 0·75 to 1·53]; difference with placebo 1·5 [95% CI -7·1 to 10·2]), 2 mg (120 [46%]; 1·05 [0·73 to 1·50]; 0·8 [-7·9 to 9·4]) and placebo (116 [46%]). None of the major secondary endpoints, including glucocorticoid tapering and time to first severe flare, were met. Serious adverse events were observed in 29 (11%) participants in the baricitinib 4 mg group, 35 (13%) in the baricitinib 2 mg group, and 22 (9%) in the placebo group. The safety profile of baricitinib in patients with SLE was consistent with the known baricitinib safety profile. INTERPRETATION: Although phase 2 data suggested baricitinib as a potential treatment for patients with SLE, which was supported in SLE-BRAVE-I, this result was not replicated in SLE-BRAVE-II. No new safety signals were observed. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Multi-cell type gene coexpression network analysis reveals coordinated interferon response and cross-cell type correlations in systemic lupus erythematosus.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is an incurable autoimmune disease disproportionately affecting women. A major obstacle in finding targeted therapies for SLE is its remarkable heterogeneity in clinical manifestations as well as in the involvement of distinct cell types. To identify cell-specific targets as well as cross-correlation relationships among expression programs of different cell types, we here analyze six major circulating immune cell types from SLE patient blood. Our results show that presence of an interferon response signature stratifies patients into two distinct groups (IFNneg vs. IFNpos). Comparing these two groups using differential gene expression and differential gene coexpression analysis, we prioritize a relatively small list of genes from classical monocytes including two known immune modulators: TNFSF13B/BAFF (target of belimumab, an approved therapeutic for SLE) and IL1RN (the basis of anakinra, a therapeutic for rheumatoid arthritis). We then develop a multi-cell type extension of the weighted gene coexpression network analysis (WGCNA) framework, termed mWGCNA. Applying mWGCNA to RNA-seq data from six sorted immune cell populations (15 SLE, 10 healthy donors), we identify a coexpression module with interferon-stimulated genes (ISGs) among all cell types and a cross-cell type correlation linking expression of specific T helper cell markers to B cell response as well as to TNFSF13B expression from myeloid cells, all of which in turn correlates with disease severity of IFNpos patients. Our results demonstrate the power of a hypothesis-free and data-driven approach to discover drug targets and to reveal novel cross-correlation across cell types in SLE with implications for other autoimmune diseases.

Remission and low disease activity are associated with lower healthcare costs: results from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) inception cohort.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to determine the independent impact of definitions of remission/low disease activity (LDA) on direct/indirect costs (DCs, ICs) in a multicentre inception cohort. METHODS: Patients from 31 centres in 10 countries were enrolled within 15 months of diagnosis and assessed annually. Five mutually exclusive disease activity states (DAS) were defined as (1) remission off-treatment: clinical (c) SLEDAI-2K=0, without prednisone/immunosuppressants; (2) remission on-treatment: cSLEDAI-2K=0, prednisone ≤5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants; (3) LDA-Toronto Cohort (TC): cSLEDAI-2K≤2, without prednisone/immunosuppressants; (4) modified lupus LDA state (mLLDAS): SLEDAI-2K≤4, no activity in major organs/systems, no new activity, prednisone ≤7.5 mg/day and/or maintenance immunosuppressants and (5) active: all remaining assessments.At each assessment, patients were stratified into the most stringent DAS fulfilled and the proportion of time in a DAS since cohort entry was determined. Annual DCs/ICs (2021 Canadian dollars) were based on healthcare use and lost workforce/non-workforce productivity over the preceding year.The association between the proportion of time in a DAS and annual DC/IC was examined through multivariable random-effects linear regressions. RESULTS: 1692 patients were followed a mean of 9.7 years; 49.0% of assessments were active. Remission/LDA (per 25% increase in time in a remission/LDA state vs active) were associated with lower annual DC/IC: remission off-treatment (DC -$C1372; IC -$C2507), remission on-treatment (DC -$C973; IC -$C2604,) LDA-TC (DC -$C1158) and mLLDAS (DC -$C1040). There were no cost differences between remission/LDA states. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that systemic lupus erythematosus patients who achieve remission, both off and on-therapy, and reductions in disease activity incur lower costs than those experiencing persistent disease activity.

Extrarenal symptoms associate with worse quality of life in patients enrolled in the AMP RA/SLE Lupus Nephritis Network.

OBJECTIVE: Lupus nephritis (LN) can occur as an isolated component of disease activity or be accompanied by diverse extrarenal manifestations. Whether isolated renal disease is sufficient to decrease health related quality of life (HRQOL) remains unknown. This study compared Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29-Item (PROMIS-29) scores in LN patients with isolated renal disease to those with extrarenal symptoms to evaluate the burden of LN on HRQOL and inform future LN clinical trials incorporating HRQOL outcomes. METHODS: A total of 181 LN patients consecutively enrolled in the multicentre multi-ethnic/racial Accelerating Medicines Partnership completed PROMIS-29 questionnaires at the time of a clinically indicated renal biopsy. Raw PROMIS-29 scores were converted to standardized T scores. RESULTS: Seventy-five (41%) patients had extrarenal disease (mean age 34, 85% female) and 106 (59%) had isolated renal (mean age 36, 82% female). Rash (45%), arthritis (40%) and alopecia (40%) were the most common extrarenal manifestations. Compared with isolated renal, patients with extrarenal disease reported significantly worse pain interference, ability to participate in social roles, physical function, and fatigue. Patients with extrarenal disease had PROMIS-29 scores that significantly differed from the general population by > 0.5 SD of the reference mean in pain interference, physical function, and fatigue. Arthritis was most strongly associated with worse scores in these three domains. CONCLUSION: Most patients had isolated renal disease and extrarenal manifestations associated with worse HRQOL. These data highlight the importance of comprehensive disease management strategies that address both renal and extrarenal manifestations to improve overall patient outcomes.

Machine learning identifies clusters of longitudinal autoantibody profiles predictive of systemic lupus erythematosus disease outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: A novel longitudinal clustering technique was applied to comprehensive autoantibody data from a large, well-characterised, multinational inception systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) cohort to determine profiles predictive of clinical outcomes. METHODS: Demographic, clinical and serological data from 805 patients with SLE obtained within 15 months of diagnosis and at 3-year and 5-year follow-up were included. For each visit, sera were assessed for 29 antinuclear antibodies (ANA) immunofluorescence patterns and 20 autoantibodies. K-means clustering on principal component analysis-transformed longitudinal autoantibody profiles identified discrete phenotypic clusters. One-way analysis of variance compared cluster enrolment demographics and clinical outcomes at 10-year follow-up. Cox proportional hazards model estimated the HR for survival adjusting for age of disease onset. RESULTS: Cluster 1 (n=137, high frequency of anti-Smith, anti-U1RNP, AC-5 (large nuclear speckled pattern) and high ANA titres) had the highest cumulative disease activity and immunosuppressants/biologics use at year 10. Cluster 2 (n=376, low anti-double stranded DNA (dsDNA) and ANA titres) had the lowest disease activity, frequency of lupus nephritis and immunosuppressants/biologics use. Cluster 3 (n=80, highest frequency of all five antiphospholipid antibodies) had the highest frequency of seizures and hypocomplementaemia. Cluster 4 (n=212) also had high disease activity and was characterised by multiple autoantibody reactivity including to antihistone, anti-dsDNA, antiribosomal P, anti-Sjögren syndrome antigen A or Ro60, anti-Sjögren syndrome antigen B or La, anti-Ro52/Tripartite Motif Protein 21, antiproliferating cell nuclear antigen and anticentromere B). Clusters 1 (adjusted HR 2.60 (95% CI 1.12 to 6.05), p=0.03) and 3 (adjusted HR 2.87 (95% CI 1.22 to 6.74), p=0.02) had lower survival compared with cluster 2. CONCLUSION: Four discrete SLE patient longitudinal autoantibody clusters were predictive of long-term disease activity, organ involvement, treatment requirements and mortality risk.

Epidemiology and outcomes of emergency department visits in systemic lupus erythematosus: Insights from the nationwide emergency department sample (NEDS).

BACKGROUND: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients are prone to frequent emergency department (ED) visits. This study explores the epidemiology and outcomes of ED visits by patients with SLE utilizing the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS). METHODS: Using NEDS (2019), SLE ED visits identified using ICD-10 codes (M32. xx) were compared with non-SLE ED visits in terms of demographic and clinical features and primary diagnoses associated with the ED visits. Factors associated with inpatient admission were analyzed using logistic regression. Variations in ED visits by age and race were assessed. RESULTS: We identified 414,139 (0.35%) ED visits for adults ≥ 18 years with SLE. ED visits with SLE comprised more women, Black patients, ages 31-50 years, Medicare as the primary payer, and had higher comorbidity burden. A greater proportion of Black and Hispanic SLE patients who visited the ED were in the youngest age category of 18-30 years (around 20%) compared to White patients (less than 10%). Non-White patients had higher Medicaid utilization (27%-32% vs 19% in White patients). Comorbidity patterns varied based on race, with more White patients having higher rates of hyperlipidemia and ischemic heart disease (IHD) and more Black patients having chronic kidney disease (CKD), hypertension, and heart failure. Categorizing by race, SLE/connective tissue disease (CTD) and infection were the most prevalent primary ED diagnosis in non-White and White patients, respectively. Age ≥ 65 years, male sex, and comorbidities were linked to a higher risk of admission. Black race (OR 0.86, p = .01) and lowest income quartile (OR 0.78, p = .003) had lower odds of inpatient admission. CONCLUSION: Infection and SLE/CTD were among the top diagnoses associated with ED visits and inpatient admission. Despite comprising a significant proportion of SLE ED visits, Black patients had lower odds of admission. While the higher prevalence of older age groups, hyperlipidemia, and IHD among White patients may partly explain the disparate results, and further study is needed to understand the role of other factors including reliance on the ED for routine care compared among Black patients, differences in insurance coverage, and potential socioeconomic biases among healthcare providers.

What Bedside Skills Could the Modern Rheumatologist Possess? Part I. The Basics.

ABSTRACT: The hands-on aspect of rheumatologic practice serves to balance its more cerebral features with the everyday necessity to touch patients to assess their condition, obtain samples for diagnosis, and deliver therapy, all cementing the important bond between patient and physician. Factors over recent years, ranging from the intercession of the electronic medical record to COVID, have weakened this bond, which we must restore if the practice of rheumatology is to return to previous levels of satisfaction. We review herein, in 2 parts, the many ways rheumatologists may interact physically with patients, with hope that pursuit of these measures can enhance satisfaction of physician and patient alike. This first installment reviews those simple skills in place before more involved technical bedside skill began to evolve over the last half century.

What Bedside Skills Could the Modern Rheumatologist Possess? Part II. "Certain Technical Procedures".

ABSTRACT: Rheumatologists have never been reluctant to adopt procedures that might enhance their diagnostic or therapeutic powers. Their propensity to penetrate the joints of the patients they were treating set them apart from the general internist. Since the 1980s, when a chance to look inside the joints they were treating attracted a few rheumatologists, other things that could be done at the bedside emerged with now an array of bedside procedures that could be part of a rheumatologist's skill set. Besides gains in diagnosis and/or therapy, each constitutes a chance to restore the physical contact between physician and patient, riven by factors of the last decade, such as electronic medical records and COVID. With such contact so important to satisfaction of the patient and physician alike, acquisition of proficiency in certain technical procedures described herein offers one path to begin restoring rheumatology to the richly fulfilling practice it once was.

Concordance and discordance in SLE clinical trial outcome measures: analysis of three anifrolumab phase 2/3 trials.

OBJECTIVES: In the anifrolumab systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) trial programme, there was one trial (TULIP-1) in which BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) responses favoured anifrolumab over placebo, but the SLE Responder Index (SRI(4)) treatment difference was not significant. We investigated the degree of concordance between BICLA and SRI(4) across anifrolumab trials in order to better understand drivers of discrepant SLE trial results. METHODS: TULIP-1, TULIP-2 (both phase 3) and MUSE (phase 2b) were randomised, 52-week trials of intravenous anifrolumab (300 mg every 4 weeks, 48 weeks; TULIP-1/TULIP-2: n=180; MUSE: n=99) or placebo (TULIP-1: n=184, TULIP-2: n=182; MUSE: n=102). Week 52 BICLA and SRI(4) outcomes were assessed for each patient. RESULTS: Most patients (78%-85%) had concordant BICLA and SRI(4) outcomes (Cohen's Kappa 0.6-0.7, nominal p<0.001). Dual BICLA/SRI(4) response rates favoured anifrolumab over placebo in TULIP-1, TULIP-2 and MUSE (all nominal p≤0.004). A discordant TULIP-1 BICLA non-responder/SRI(4) responder subgroup was identified (40/364, 11% of TULIP-1 population), comprising more patients receiving placebo (n=28) than anifrolumab (n=12). In this subgroup, placebo-treated patients had lower baseline disease activity, joint counts and glucocorticoid tapering rates, and more placebo-treated patients had arthritis response than anifrolumab-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Across trials, most patients had concordant BICLA/SRI(4) outcomes and dual BICLA/SRI(4) responses favoured anifrolumab. A BICLA non-responder/SRI(4) responder subgroup was identified where imbalances of key factors driving the BICLA/SRI(4) discordance (disease activity, glucocorticoid taper) disproportionately favoured the TULIP-1 placebo group. Careful attention to baseline disease activity and monitoring glucocorticoid taper variation will be essential in future SLE trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT02446912 and NCT02446899.

Anifrolumab efficacy and safety by type I interferon gene signature and clinical subgroups in patients with SLE: post hoc analysis of pooled data from two phase III trials.

OBJECTIVES: To characterise the efficacy and safety of anifrolumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) according to interferon gene signature (IFNGS), demographic and clinical subgroups. METHODS: We performed post hoc analyses of pooled data from the 52-week phase III TULIP-1/TULIP-2 placebo-controlled trials of intravenous anifrolumab in moderate-to-severe SLE. Outcomes were assessed in predefined subgroups: IFNGS (high/low), age, sex, body mass index, race, geographic region, age of onset, glucocorticoid use, disease activity and serological markers. RESULTS: In pooled data, patients received anifrolumab 300 mg (360/726) or placebo (366/726); 82.6% were IFNGS-high. IFNGS-high patients had greater baseline disease activity and were more likely to have abnormal serological markers versus IFNGS-low patients. In the total population, a greater proportion of patients treated with anifrolumab versus placebo achieved British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) response at week 52 (difference 16.6%; nominal p<0.001). BICLA response treatment differences with anifrolumab versus placebo were comparable to the total population across most predefined subgroups, including subgroups for baseline glucocorticoid dosage (<10/≥10 mg/day prednisone/equivalent) and for clinical disease activity (SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 score <10/≥10). Subgroups with larger treatment differences included IFNGS-high patients (18.2%), patients with abnormal baseline serological markers (23.1%) and Asian patients (29.2%). The safety profile of anifrolumab was similar across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this study supports the consistent efficacy and safety of anifrolumab across a range of patients with moderate-to-severe SLE. In a few subgroups, small sample sizes limited conclusions from being drawn regarding the treatment benefit with anifrolumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02446912, NCT02446899.

Phase 3, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled study evaluating the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab, an anti-interleukin-12/23 p40 antibody, in a phase 3, randomised, placebo-controlled study of patients with active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) despite receiving standard-of-care. METHODS: Active SLE patients (SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) ≥6 during screening and SLEDAI-2K ≥4 for clinical features at week 0) despite receiving oral glucocorticoids, antimalarials, or immunomodulatory drugs were randomised (3:2) to receive ustekinumab (intravenous infusion ~6 mg/kg at week 0, followed by subcutaneous injections of ustekinumab 90 mg at week 8 and every 8 weeks) or placebo through week 48. The primary endpoint was SLE Responder Index (SRI)-4 at week 52, and major secondary endpoints included time to flare through week 52 and SRI-4 at week 24. RESULTS: At baseline, 516 patients were randomised to placebo (n=208) or ustekinumab (n=308). Following the planned interim analysis, the sponsor discontinued the study due to lack of efficacy but no safety concerns. Efficacy analyses included 289 patients (placebo, n=116; ustekinumab, n=173) who completed or would have had a week 52 visit at study discontinuation. At week 52, 44% of ustekinumab patients and 56% of placebo patients had an SRI-4 response; there were no appreciable differences between the treatment groups in the major secondary endpoints. Through week 52, 28% of ustekinumab patients and 32% of placebo patients had a British Isles Lupus Assessment Group flare, with a mean time to first flare of 204.7 and 200.4 days, respectively. Through week 52, 70% of ustekinumab patients and 74% of placebo patients had ≥1 adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Ustekinumab did not demonstrate superiority over placebo in this population of adults with active SLE; adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of ustekinumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03517722.

Flares after hydroxychloroquine reduction or discontinuation: results from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) inception cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) flares following hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) reduction or discontinuation versus HCQ maintenance. METHODS: We analysed prospective data from the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) cohort, enrolled from 33 sites within 15 months of SLE diagnosis and followed annually (1999-2019). We evaluated person-time contributed while on the initial HCQ dose ('maintenance'), comparing this with person-time contributed after a first dose reduction, and after a first HCQ discontinuation. We estimated time to first flare, defined as either subsequent need for therapy augmentation, increase of ≥4 points in the SLE Disease Activity Index-2000, or hospitalisation for SLE. We estimated adjusted HRs (aHRs) with 95% CIs associated with reducing/discontinuing HCQ (vs maintenance). We also conducted separate multivariable hazard regressions in each HCQ subcohort to identify factors associated with flare. RESULTS: We studied 1460 (90% female) patients initiating HCQ. aHRs for first SLE flare were 1.20 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.38) and 1.56 (95% CI 1.31 to 1.86) for the HCQ reduction and discontinuation groups, respectively, versus HCQ maintenance. Patients with low educational level were at particular risk of flaring after HCQ discontinuation (aHR 1.43, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.87). Prednisone use at time-zero was associated with over 1.5-fold increase in flare risk in all HCQ subcohorts. CONCLUSIONS: SLE flare risk was higher after HCQ taper/discontinuation versus HCQ maintenance. Decisions to maintain, reduce or stop HCQ may affect specific subgroups differently, including those on prednisone and/or with low education. Further study of special groups (eg, seniors) may be helpful.

High incidence of proliferative and membranous nephritis in SLE patients with low proteinuria in the Accelerating Medicines Partnership.

OBJECTIVE: Delayed detection of LN associates with worse outcomes. There are conflicting recommendations regarding a threshold level of proteinuria at which biopsy will likely yield actionable management. This study addressed the association of urine protein:creatinine ratios (UPCR) with clinical characteristics and investigated the incidence of proliferative and membranous histology in patients with a UPCR between 0.5 and 1. METHODS: A total of 275 SLE patients (113 first biopsy, 162 repeat) were enrolled in the multicentre multi-ethnic/racial Accelerating Medicines Partnership across 15 US sites at the time of a clinically indicated renal biopsy. Patients were followed for 1 year. RESULTS: At biopsy, 54 patients had UPCR <1 and 221 had UPCR ≥1. Independent of UPCR or biopsy number, a majority (92%) of patients had class III, IV, V or mixed histology. Moreover, patients with UPCR <1 and class III, IV, V, or mixed had a median activity index of 4.5 and chronicity index of 3, yet 39% of these patients had an inactive sediment. Neither anti-dsDNA nor low complement distinguished class I or II from III, IV, V or mixed in patients with UPCR <1. Of 29 patients with baseline UPCR <1 and class III, IV, V or mixed, 23 (79%) had a UPCR <0.5 at 1 year. CONCLUSION: In this prospective study, three-quarters of patients with UPCR <1 had histology showing class III, IV, V or mixed with accompanying activity and chronicity despite an inactive sediment or normal serologies. These data support renal biopsy at thresholds lower than a UPCR of 1.

An ACVR1R375P pathogenic variant in two families with mild fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva.

Genetic variants are vital in informing clinical phenotypes, aiding physical diagnosis, guiding genetic counseling, understanding the molecular basis of disease, and potentially stimulating drug development. Here we describe two families with an ultrarare ACVR1 gain-of-function pathogenic variant (codon 375, Arginine > Proline; ACVR1R375P ) responsible for a mild nonclassic fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP) phenotype. Both families include people with the ultrarare ACVR1R375P variant who exhibit features of FOP while other individuals currently do not express any clinical signs of FOP. Thus, the mild ACVR1R375P variant greatly expands the scope and understanding of this rare disorder.

Regarding Arthroscopy: Can Orthopedists and Rheumatologists Be Friends?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Rheumatologists' interest in arthroscopy began before the 1980s, when many era practitioners began to take up the procedure in earnest. Some of the important players in pre-World War II explorations of arthroscopy were rheumatologists, and the father of modern arthroscopy Makei Watanabe counted many rheumatologists among his postwar students, who were publishing about arthroscopic insights into rheumatic conditions in the 1960s and 1970s. We chose to review this evolution to demonstrate the diverging interests of rheumatologists and orthopedists in arthroscopy and emphasize the chances for reconciliation and cooperation. Methods involve our personal recollection and review of the literature. RESULTS: Guidelines for the practice of arthroscopy were published by the American Rheumatism Association (now the American College of Rheumatology) 7 years before similar guidelines appeared from the Arthroscopy Association of North America. American rheumatologists ceased arthroscopy when controlled trials showed no effect in osteoarthritis beyond placebo and biologics for synovitis virtually eliminated situations in which synovectomy might be considered. The research potential of arthroscopy has been realized mainly by European rheumatologists, although the ultrasound-guided biopsy is supplanting arthroscopy as means to secure synovium for investigation, despite the advantages of the latter, such as the ability to obtain larger amounts of tissue, select tissue based on macroscopic appearance, sample multiple area in the same joint, and deliver the potentially therapeutic effect of washout. New miniscopes suitable for office use could restore some of the lagging interest in arthroscopy for investigation. Orthopedists have generally been resistant to rheumatologists doing arthroscopy but would not be sharing any turf with rheumatologists using the miniscope. CONCLUSIONS: We hope that we orthopedists and rheumatologists could be friends as we enter this new phase of arthroscopy as we use the technique for different purposes.

Efficacy and safety of filgotinib in Japanese patients with refractory rheumatoid arthritis: Subgroup analyses of a global phase 3 study (FINCH 2).

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate efficacy and safety of filgotinib in Japanese RA patients who have failed or were intolerant to one or more biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) from the global FINCH 2 study (NCT02873936). METHODS: This subgroup analysis was performed using the predefined statistical analyses. The FINCH 2 study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 study in adult RA patients with inadequate response to bDMARDs. The randomized patients were treated with once-daily filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg or placebo on a background of csDMARDs for 24 weeks. RESULTS: Of 449 patients enrolled in the overall population, 40 patients were enrolled from Japan. In the Japanese population, the American College of Rheumatology 20% response rates at week 12 (primary endpoint) were 83.3% and 53.3% for filgotinib, 200 mg and 100 mg, respectively, vs 30.8% for placebo. Filgotinib was well tolerated, similar to the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: Both doses of once-daily filgotinib 200 mg and filgotinib 100 mg were effective, and generally well-tolerated in Japanese patients with active refractory RA.