RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of TNF inhibitors (adalimumab (ADA) and infliximab (IFX)) vs tocilizumab (TCZ) in patients with refractory cystoid macular edema (CME) due to Behçet's disease (BD). METHODS: Multicenter study of patients with BD-associated CME refractory to conventional and/or biological immunosuppressive drugs. From a cohort of 177 patients treated with anti-TNF and 14 patients treated with TCZ, we selected those with CME at baseline. We analyzed the evolution of macular thickness (main outcome), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and intraocular inflammation (Tyndall and vitritis) from baseline up to 4 years in the 3 groups mentioned. RESULTS: 49 patients and 72 eyes with CME were included. ADA was used in 25 patients (40 eyes), IFX in 15 (21 eyes) and TCZ in 9 (11 eyes). No statistically significant baseline differences were observed between the 3 groups except for a lower basal BCVA in TCZ group and a higher basal degree of intraocular inflammation in ADA group. Most patients from all groups had received several conventional immunosuppressive drugs. In addition, most patients in the group of TCZ had also received anti-TNF agents. Biological therapy was used in monotherapy (n=8) or combined with conventional immunosuppressive drugs (n=41). Macular thickness progressively decreased in the 3 groups, with no signs of CME after 1 year of treatment. Similarly, BCVA improvement and inflammatory intraocular remission was achieved in all groups. CONCLUSION: Refractory CME associated with BD uveitis can be effectively treated either with ADA, IFX or TCZ. Furthermore, TCZ is effective in patients resistant to anti-TNF therapy.
Assuntos
Síndrome de Behçet , Produtos Biológicos , Edema Macular , Uveíte , Humanos , Síndrome de Behçet/complicações , Síndrome de Behçet/tratamento farmacológico , Síndrome de Behçet/diagnóstico , Inibidores do Fator de Necrose Tumoral/uso terapêutico , Edema Macular/etiologia , Edema Macular/complicações , Resultado do Tratamento , Uveíte/complicações , Uveíte/tratamento farmacológico , Adalimumab/uso terapêutico , Imunossupressores/uso terapêutico , Infliximab/uso terapêutico , Inflamação/tratamento farmacológico , Produtos Biológicos/uso terapêutico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estudos Multicêntricos como AssuntoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Acute posterior multifocal placoid pigment epitheliopathy (APMPPE) is an ophthalmologic condition of likely immune origin. Typically, it presents as a chorioretinitis with bilateral visual disturbance and characteristic funduscopic lesions of the retinal pigment epithelium. APMPPE has been associated with several systemic and neurological complications, including cerebrovascular diseases. CASE REPORT: A 58-year-old woman presented with sudden right hemiparesis and dysarthria, with magnetic resonance imaging evidence of an acute ischemic lesion in the left pons. Five days later, she developed contralateral hemiparesis and evolved into a locked-in syndrome. A new lesion located at the right pontomedullary junction was detected by magnetic resonance imaging. The patient developed a visual deterioration that had started 1 week before admission. An ophthalmologic evaluation showed visual acuity loss (20/200 in both eyes) and characteristic yellow-white lesions in the posterior pole of both eyes. Laboratory analyses were remarkable for positive antinuclear antibodies, an elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and C-reactive protein. The cerebrospinal fluid showed elevated protein levels, lymphocytic pleocytosis, and normal glucose levels. The fundoscopy findings together with recurrent strokes led to the diagnosis of APMPPE and appropriate immunomodulatory treatment with corticosteroids and azathioprine was started. CONCLUSIONS: This case illustrates the importance of careful evaluation and high clinical suspicion for this entity when dealing with patients with new-onset headache or stroke associated with visual impairment. Proper ophthalmologic evaluation is important so that adequate therapy is established.
Assuntos
Síndrome dos Pontos Brancos/diagnóstico , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , RecidivaRESUMO
Graves' orbitopathy (GO) is the most common extrathyroidal manifestation of Graves' disease (GD). Our aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of Tocilizumab (TCZ) in GO refractory to conventional therapy. This was an open-label multicenter study of glucocorticoid-resistant GO treated with TCZ. The main outcomes were the best-corrected visual acuity (BVCA), Clinical Activity Score (CAS) and intraocular pressure (IOP). These outcome variables were assessed at baseline, 1st, 3rd, 6th and 12th month after TCZ therapy onset. The severity of GO was assessed according to the European Group on Graves' Orbitopathy (EUGOGO). We studied 48 (38 women and 10 men) patients (95 eyes); mean age ± standard deviation 51 ± 11.8 years. Before TCZ and besides oral glucocorticoids, they had received IV methylprednisolone (n = 43), or selenium (n = 11). GO disease was moderate (n =29) or severe (n = 19) and dysthyroid optic neuropathy (DON) (n = 7). TCZ was used in monotherapy (n = 45) or combined (n = 3) at a dose of 8 mg/kg IV every four weeks (n = 43) or 162 mg/s.c. every week (n = 5). TCZ yielded a significant improvement in all of the main outcomes at the 1st month that was maintained at one year. Comparing the baseline with data at 1 year all of the variables improved; BCVA (0.78 ± 0.25 vs. 0.9 ± 0.16; p = 0.0001), CAS (4.64 ± 1.5 vs. 1.05 ± 1.27; p = 0.0001) and intraocular pressure (IOP) (19.05 ± 4.1 vs. 16.73 ± 3.4 mmHg; p = 0.007). After a mean follow-up of 16.1 ± 2.1 months, low disease activity (CAS ≤ 3), was achieved in 88 eyes (92.6%) and TCZ was withdrawn in 29 cases due to low disease activity (n = 25) or inefficacy (n = 4). No serious adverse events were observed. In conclusion, TCZ is a useful and safe therapeutic option in refractory GO treatment.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of infliximab (IFX) versus adalimumab (ADA) as a first-line biologic drug over 1 year of treatment in a large series of patients with refractory uveitis due to Behçet's disease (BD). METHODS: We conducted an open-label multicenter study of IFX versus ADA for BD-related uveitis refractory to conventional nonbiologic treatment. IFX or ADA was chosen as the first-line biologic agent based on physician and patient agreement. Patients received 3-5 mg/kg intravenous IFX at 0, 2, and 6 weeks and every 4-8 weeks thereafter, or 40 mg subcutaneous ADA every other week without a loading dose. Ocular parameters were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: The study included 177 patients (316 affected eyes), of whom 103 received IFX and 74 received ADA. There were no significant baseline differences between treatment groups in main demographic features, previous therapy, or ocular sign severity. After 1 year of therapy, we observed an improvement in all ocular parameters in both groups. However, patients receiving ADA had significantly better outcomes in some parameters, including improvement in anterior chamber inflammation (92.31% versus 78.18% for IFX; P = 0.06), improvement in vitritis (93.33% versus 78.95% for IFX; P = 0.04), and best-corrected visual acuity (mean ± SD 0.81 ± 0.26 versus 0.67 ± 0.34 for IFX; P = 0.001). A nonsignificant difference was seen for macular thickness (mean ± SD 250.62 ± 36.85 for ADA versus 264.89 ± 59.74 for IFX; P = 0.15), and improvement in retinal vasculitis was similar between the 2 groups (95% for ADA versus 97% for IFX; P = 0.28). The drug retention rate was higher in the ADA group (95.24% versus 84.95% for IFX; P = 0.042). CONCLUSION: Although both IFX and ADA are efficacious in refractory BD-related uveitis, ADA appears to be associated with better outcomes than IFX after 1 year of follow-up.