Safety and effectiveness of abatacept in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results from the PRINTO/PRCSG registry.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to report the interim 5-year safety and effectiveness of abatacept in patients with JIA in the PRINTO/PRCSG registry. METHODS: The Abatacept JIA Registry (NCT01357668) is an ongoing observational study of children with JIA receiving abatacept; enrolment started in January 2013. Clinical sites enrolled patients with JIA starting or currently receiving abatacept. Eligible patients were assessed for safety (primary end point) and effectiveness over 10 years. Effectiveness was measured by clinical 10-joint Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score (cJADAS10) in patients with JIA over 5 years. As-observed analysis is presented according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. RESULTS: As of 31 March 2020, 587 patients were enrolled; 569 are included in this analysis (including 134 new users) with 1214.6 patient-years of safety data available. Over 5 years, the incidence rate (IR) per 100 patient-years of follow-up of serious adverse events was 5.52 (95% CI: 4.27, 7.01) and of events of special interest was 3.62 (95% CI: 2.63, 4.86), with 18 serious infections [IR 1.48 (95% CI: 0.88, 2.34)]. As early as month 3, 55.9% of patients achieved cJADAS10 low disease activity and inactive disease (20.3%, 72/354 and 35.6%, 126/354, respectively), sustained over 5 years. Disease activity measures improvement over 5 years across JIA categories. CONCLUSION: Abatacept was well tolerated in patients with JIA, with no new safety signals identified and with well-controlled disease activity, including some patients achieving inactive disease or remission. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01357668.

Long-term efficacy and safety of subcutaneous tocilizumab in clinical trials of polyarticular or systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous tocilizumab (SC-TCZ) treatment in a long-term extension (LTE) of clinical trials in polyarticular or systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (pJIA or sJIA). METHODS: Patients with pJIA or sJIA from two open-label, 52-week phase 1b core trials of SC-TCZ who had adequate response per investigator assessment entered the LTE and continued SC-TCZ treatment according to body weight-based dosing regimens until commercial availability or up to 5 years. Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy were assessed for up to 3 years, and safety for up to 5 years in the LTE. RESULTS: Forty-four patients with pJIA and 38 patients with sJIA entered the LTE. Tocilizumab trough concentrations were maintained within the range expected to provide clinical benefit (mean values: pJIA, ∼10 µg/ml; sJIA, ∼75 µg/ml over 3 years). Pharmacodynamic parameters (interleukin-6, soluble interleukin-6 receptor, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein) were maintained throughout the LTE at levels achieved in the core trials. Inactive disease per American College of Rheumatology provisional criteria was reported for 90% (17/19) and 53% (8/15) of patients with pJIA and 91% (10/11) and 92% (12/13) of patients with sJIA in the <30 and ≥30 kg body weight groups, respectively. Serious adverse events in the LTE were reported in six patients with pJIA (13.6%; five serious infections) and five patients with sJIA (13.2%; one serious infection). CONCLUSION: Patients with pJIA or sJIA experienced long-term disease control with SC-TCZ treatment. Long-term safety was consistent with the known tocilizumab safety profile. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02165345.

Selection strategy of second-line biologic therapies in adult patients with ulcerative colitis following prior biologic treatment failure: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Optimizing second-line biologic therapies for adult ulcerative colitis (UC) post first-line failure is essential. OBJECTIVE: Compare second-line biologic therapy efficacy in adult UC patients with prior treatment failure. METHODS: A comprehensive search of electronic databases up to May 2023 was conducted to assess second-line biologic therapy efficacy using a random effects model. Parameters analyzed included clinical remission rate, clinical response rate, mucosal healing rate, annual discontinuation rate, and colectomy rates. RESULTS: Forty-three research papers were analyzed. Clinical remission rates for second-line biologics were ranked at 6-14 weeks: Infliximab (30%) was followed by Vedolizumab (29%), Ustekinumab (27%), and Adalimumab (19%). At 52-54 weeks, the order shifted, with Vedolizumab (35%) followed by Infliximab (32%), Ustekinumab (31%), and Adalimumab (26%). The mucosal healing rate was 21%, ranked as: Infliximab (31%), Vedolizumab (21%), Adalimumab (21%), and Ustekinumab (14%). The annual discontinuation rate stood at 20%, with Adalimumab (25%), Vedolizumab (18%), Infliximab (17%), and Ustekinumab (16%). Discontinuation rates due to primary failure (PF), secondary failure (SF), and adverse events (AE) were 6%, 12%, and 3%, respectively. The annual colectomy rate was 9%, with Adalimumab (15%) followed by Vedolizumab (10%), Ustekinumab (9%), and Infliximab (5%), and colectomy rates of 10% due to PF, 12% due to SF, and 4% due to AE. CONCLUSION: For UC patients with first-line treatment failure, it is recommended to prioritize infliximab or vedolizumab as second-line biologic therapies, while avoiding adalimumab as the primary choice. Further clinical trials are necessary to assess ustekinumab efficacy accurately.

Is the risk of infection higher during treatment with secukinumab than with TNF inhibitors? An observational study from the Nordic countries.

OBJECTIVES: The positioning of secukinumab in the treatment of axial SpA (axSpA) and PsA is debated, partly due to a limited understanding of the comparative safety of the available treatments. We aimed to assess the risk of the key safety outcome infections during treatment with secukinumab and TNF inhibitors (TNFi). METHODS: Patients with SpA and PsA starting secukinumab or TNFi year 2015 through 2018 were identified in four Nordic rheumatology registers. The first hospitalized infection during the first year of treatment was identified through linkage to national registers. Incidence rates (IRs) with 95% CIs per 100 patient-years were calculated. Adjusted hazard ratios were estimated through Cox regression, with secukinumab as the reference. Several sensitivity analyses were performed to investigate confounding by indication. RESULTS: Among 7708 patients with SpA and 5760 patients with PsA, we identified 16 229 treatment courses of TNFi (53% bionaïve) and 1948 with secukinumab (11% bionaïve). For secukinumab, the first-year risk of hospitalized infection was 3.5% (IR 5.0; 3.9-6.3), compared with 1.7% (IR 2.3; 1.7-3.0) during 3201 courses with adalimumab, with the IRs for other TNFi lying in between these values. The adjusted HR for adalimumab, compared with secukinumab, was 0.58 (0.39-0.85). In sensitivity analyses, the difference from secukinumab was somewhat attenuated and in some analyses no longer statistically significant. CONCLUSION: When used according to clinical practice in the Nordic countries, the observed first-year absolute risk of hospitalized infection was doubled for secukinumab compared with adalimumab. This excess risk seemed largely explained by confounding by indication.

Prevalence and clinical associations of ultrasound-confirmed enthesitis in systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of US-confirmed enthesitis in a cohort of patients with SLE and to analyse the clinical associations to enthesitis during the course of SLE. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of the SLE cohort of the Lupus Unit of the Careggi University Hospital, US examinations of SLE patients presenting with tender and/or swollen joints were retrieved to assess the presence of enthesitis. Patients with US-proven enthesitis were compared with SLE controls with tender and/or swollen joints who showed no US evidence of enthesitis. Clinical and laboratory features were compared at disease onset and during follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 400 patients fulfilling EULAR/ACR classification criteria for SLE were assessed. Of these, 106 underwent articular US examination. Evidence of enthesitis was found in 31/106 (29.2%) patients. Seventy-one patients without US-enthesitis were included as controls; four were excluded due to lack of follow-up data. Laboratory and clinical features were comparable between cases and controls at disease onset. Throughout a median follow-up of 10.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 8.3-23.3) years for cases and 12.4 (IQR 7.2-13.3) years for controls, patients with enthesitis were less likely to develop renal involvement (22.6% vs 46.5%, P = 0.028) and failed B cell depletion more frequently (75.0% vs 0%). CONCLUSION: In SLE patients with clinically active joints, US-proven enthesitis is a fairly common finding. Enthesitis in SLE could be the hallmark of a distinct disease phenotype with less renal involvement, more arthritis and low response to anti-CD 20 therapy, potentially requiring a tailored treatment.

Long-term safety and efficacy of sarilumab with or without background csDMARDs in rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of sarilumab with/without conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs in RA. METHODS: The analyses evaluated two open-label extensions (OLEs): EXTEND and MONARCH OLE, which included patients from six randomized trials. Patients received sarilumab 200 mg once every 2 weeks (q2w) for at least 264 weeks up to 516 weeks (EXTEND: Sarilumab Monotherapy and Sarilumab + csDMARD groups) or for 276 weeks (MONARCH OLE: Continuation and Switch groups). Primary endpoints included safety, immunogenicity and changes in laboratory parameters. Secondary endpoints included clinical signs and symptoms along with health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) questionnaires. RESULTS: The Sarilumab Monotherapy (n = 111), Continuation (n = 165) and Switch (n = 155) groups received sarilumab monotherapy, while the Sarilumab + csDMARD group (n = 1910) received sarilumab in combination with csDMARDs. Incidence of one or more treatment-emergent adverse events was 126 (Sarilumab Monotherapy group), 169 (Sarilumab + csDMARD group), 159 (Continuation group) and 159 (Switch group) events/100 patient-years. Neutropenia was the most common adverse event. Neutropenia was not associated with an increased incidence of infections. Most neutropenia cases normalized on-treatment. Adverse events of special interests, such as malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolism and gastrointestinal perforations, were rare. Immunogenicity was low and not associated with hypersensitivity reactions or discontinuations due to lack or loss of efficacy. Improvements in clinical signs and symptoms and HRQOL, observed during the initial blinded trials, were maintained throughout the OLE assessment period. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term sarilumab treatment with/without csDMARDs in patients with RA revealed no new safety findings. Efficacy and HRQOL were maintained or further increased over the open-label assessment period. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EXTEND, ClinicalTrials.gov, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01146652, NCT01146652; MONARCH OLE, ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02332590, NCT02332590.

Seroconversion after a third COVID-19 vaccine is affected by rituximab dose but persistence is not in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: In patients with RA treated with (ultra-)low-dose rituximab (RTX), we investigated the association of dosing and timing of RTX on seroconversion after a third coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and the persistence of humoral response after a two-dose vaccination. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this monocentre observational study, patients from the COVAC cohort were included in the third vaccine analysis if humoral response was obtained 2-6 weeks after a third vaccination in previous non-responders and in the persistence analysis if a follow-up humoral response was obtained before a third vaccination in previous responders. Dichotomization between positive and negative response was based on the assay cut-off. The association between the latest RTX dose before first vaccination, timing between the latest RTX dose and vaccination and response was analysed with univariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 196 patients in the cohort, 98 were included in the third vaccine analysis and 23 in the persistence analysis. Third vaccination response was 19/98 (19%) and was higher for 200 mg RTX users [5/13 (38%)] than for 500 and 1000 mg users [7/37 (19%) and 7/48 (15%), respectively]. Non-significant trends were seen for higher response with lower dosing [200 vs 1000 mg: odds ratio (OR) 3.66 (95% CI 0.93, 14.0)] and later timing [per month since infusion: OR 1.16 (95% CI 0.97, 1.35)]. Humoral response persisted in 96% (22/23) and 89% (8/9) of patients who received RTX between the two measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Repeated vaccination as late as possible after the lowest RTX dose possible seems the best vaccination strategy. A once positive humoral response after COVID-19 vaccination persists irrespective of intercurrent RTX infusion. Study registration. Netherlands Trial Registry (https://www.trialregister.nl/), NL9342.

Biologics with or without methotrexate in treatment of polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis: effectiveness, safety and drug survival.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of additionally given MTX on biologic treatment of polyarticular JIA in terms of effectiveness, safety and drug survival. METHODS: Patients suffering from polyarticular JIA and treated with either monotherapy with a first biologic or a combination of a biologic and MTX were selected from the BIKER registry. The TNF-α inhibitors (TNFi) adalimumab, etanercept and golimumab and the IL-6 inhibitor tocilizumab were considered. Upon a non-randomized study design, we adjusted the different cohorts using propensity score matching to improve comparability. RESULTS: A total of 2148 patients entered the analysis, who were treated by either combination therapy (n = 1464) or monotherapy (n = 684). Disease activity declined significantly more in patients upon combination therapy than upon biologic monotherapy. Comparison of adjusted cohorts revealed that patients who received TNFi gained more benefit from additionally given MTX than patients treated with tocilizumab. Median survival time of therapy with biologics was significantly longer upon combination therapy (3.1 years) than with monotherapy (2.7 years), as demonstrated by a Kaplan-Meier analysis (log rank test: P = 0.002). The safety profile was moderately affected by additional MTX due to increased incidence of gastrointestinal and hepatic adverse events. Serious adverse events occurred at an equal rate of 3.6 events per 100 patient-years in both cohorts. CONCLUSION: Additionally given MTX improves the effectiveness of biologic treatment in polyarticular JIA without seriously compromising treatment safety. Especially TNFi benefit from combination, while no improvement in outcome has been observed by combining tocilizumab with MTX.

Efficacy of subcutaneous vs intravenous infliximab in rheumatoid arthritis: a post-hoc analysis of a randomized phase III trial.

OBJECTIVES: The primary endpoint of the pivotal phase III study of infliximab (IFX) s.c. demonstrated non-inferiority of s.c. to i.v. IFX, based on 28-joint DAS-CRP (DAS28-CRP) improvement at week (W) 22 (NCT03147248). This post-hoc analysis investigated whether numerical differences in efficacy outcomes at W30/54 were statistically significant, using conservative imputation methods. METHODS: Patients with active RA and inadequate response to MTX received IFX i.v. 3 mg/kg at W0 and W2 (induction) and were randomized (1:1) to IFX s.c. 120 mg every 2 weeks or i.v. 3 mg/kg every 8 weeks thereafter (maintenance). Patients randomized to IFX i.v. switched to IFX s.c. from W30-54. This post-hoc analysis compared efficacy outcomes for s.c. and i.v. groups pre-switch (W30) and post-switch (W54) using last observation carried forward (LOCF) and non-responder imputation (NRI) methods. RESULTS: Of 343 randomized patients, 165 (IFX s.c.) and 174 (IFX i.v.) were analysed. At W30, significantly improved outcomes were identified with s.c. vs i.v. IFX for DAS28-CRP/DAS28-ESR/Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI)/Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) scores (LOCF); ACR/good EULAR responses, DAS28-CRP/Boolean remission, and DAS28-CRP/DAS28-ESR/CDAI/SDAI low disease activity and remission (LOCF and/or NRI); and minimal clinically important difference in HAQ score (LOCF and NRI). After switching to IFX s.c. from IFX i.v., fewer significant between-group differences were identified at W54. CONCLUSION: IFX s.c. showed improved efficacy at W30 compared with IFX i.v., and the reduced between-group difference in efficacy outcomes at W54 after switching supports the results suggesting benefits of IFX s.c. compared with IFX i.v. at W30. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClincialTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03147248, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03147248.

Effectiveness of biologic therapies in children with palmoplantar plaque psoriasis: An analysis of real-life data from the BiPe cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Palmoplantar plaque psoriasis is a frequent clinical subtype of childhood psoriasis. This study evaluated the effectiveness of biologic therapies in children with palmoplantar plaque psoriasis using data from the two Biological treatments for Pediatric Psoriasis (BiPe) cohorts. METHODS: Data for all 170 patients included in the BiPe cohorts were analyzed. Data on the effectiveness (PGA, PASI between baseline and 3 months of treatment) of biologic therapies were then compared between children with palmoplantar plaque psoriasis (n = 20) and those with generalized plaque psoriasis (n = 136). Clinical and demographic data were also analyzed. RESULTS: Children in the palmoplantar group were more likely to be male (p = .04), with an earlier age of psoriasis onset (p < .001), and more frequent nail involvement (p < .001). After 3 months of biologic treatment, mean PGA scores were higher in the palmoplantar group than in the generalized plaque psoriasis group (p = .004). In the palmoplantar group, continuation rates were higher for adalimumab than for etanercept or ustekinumab (p = .01). Primary inefficacy was a more frequent reason for stopping biologic therapies in the palmoplantar group (p = .01), and disease remission was less frequent (p = .05). Combined systemic and biologic therapies were more frequently used in palmoplantar plaque psoriasis (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the treatment-resistant nature of palmoplantar plaque psoriasis and indicated that adalimumab could be the most effective biologic treatment. Larger studies are needed to allow therapeutic algorithms for palmoplantar plaque psoriasis to be proposed in pediatric psoriasis management guidelines.

Interactions Between Biologic Therapies and Other Treatment Modalities.

Biologic therapies are becoming increasingly utilized by veterinarians. The literature regarding the interaction of biologic therapies with other therapeutics is still in its infancy. Initial studies have examined the effects of exercise, stress, various pharmaceutical interventions, extracorporeal shockwave, therapeutic laser, and hyperbaric oxygen on biologic therapies. Continued research is imperative as owners and veterinarians increasingly choose a multimodal approach to injury and illness. Further, understanding the effects of concurrently administered treatments and pharmaceuticals as well as the health status of the horse is imperative to providing the optimal therapeutic outcome.

Humoral response to coronavirus disease-19 vaccines is dependent on dosage and timing of rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: Humoral response to vaccines in RA patients treated with rituximab (RTX) in standard dosages (≥1000 mg) is decreased. Ultra-low dosages (500 or 200 mg) may have better response. Also, timing after latest RTX infusion may be an important variable. We aimed to investigate the influence of RTX dosage and timing on response to COVID-19 vaccination in RA patients. METHODS: A single-centre observational study (n = 196) investigated the humoral response, measured by total Ig anti-COVID-19 assay (positive response ≥1.1), 2-6 weeks after complete COVID-19 vaccination. A multivariable logistic regression model was built to study the effect of RTX dosage and time between latest rituximab and vaccination on response, adjusting for age and methotrexate use. RESULTS: After two-dose vaccination, the response rate was significantly better for patients receiving 200 mg (n = 31, 45%) rituximab compared with 1000 mg (n = 98, 26%; odds ratio 3.07, 95% CI 1.14-8.27) and for each additional month between latest rituximab and vaccination (OR 1.67, 1.39-2.01). CONCLUSION: Both increased time between latest rituximab infusion and complete vaccination, and 200 mg as latest dose were associated with a better response to COVID-19 vaccination and should be considered when trying to increase vaccine response after rituximab in RA patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register, https://www.trialregister.nl/, NL9342.

Safety and immunogenicity of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in adolescents with rheumatic diseases treated with immunomodulatory medications.

OBJECTIVES: Adolescents with juvenile-onset autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRDs) could be at risk for disease flare secondary to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection or to withholding anti-inflammatory therapy. While vaccination can protect against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), safety and immunogenicity data regarding anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines among adolescents with AIIRDs are limited. This international, prospective, multicentre study evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of the BNT162b2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine among adolescents and young adults with juvenile-onset AIIRDs, 80% of whom are on chronic immunomodulatory therapy. METHODS: Vaccine side effects, disease activity and short-term efficacy were evaluated after 3 months in 91 patients. Anti-spike S1/S2 IgG antibody levels were evaluated in 37 patients and 22 controls 2-9 weeks after the second dose. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients and 40 healthy controls were included. The safety profile was good, with 96.7% (n = 88) of patients reporting mild or no side effects and no change in disease activity. However, three patients had transient acute symptoms: two following the first vaccination (renal failure and pulmonary haemorrhage) and one following the second dose (mild lupus flare vs viral infection). The seropositivity rate was 97.3% in the AIIRD group compared with 100% among controls. However, anti-S1/S2 antibody titres were significantly lower in the AIIRD group compared with controls [242 (s.d. 136.4) vs 387.8 (57.3) BAU/ml, respectively; P < 0.0001]. No cases of COVID-19 were documented during the 3 month follow-up. CONCLUSION: Vaccination of juvenile-onset AIIRD patients demonstrated good short-term safety and efficacy and a high seropositivity rate but lower anti-S1/S2 antibody titres compared with healthy controls. These results should encourage vaccination of adolescents with juvenile-onset AIIRDs, even while on immunomodulation.

Risk of flare after tapering or withdrawal of biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis or axial spondyloarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate flare risk when tapering or withdrawing biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs (bDMARDs or tsDMARDs) compared with continuation in patients with inflammatory arthritis in sustained remission or with low disease activity. METHODS: Articles were identified in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase and Web of Science. Eligible trials were randomized controlled trials comparing tapering and/or withdrawal of bDMARDs and/or tsDMARDs with the standard dose in inflammatory arthritis. Random effects meta-analysis was performed with risk ratio (RR) or Peto's odds ratio (POR) for sparse events and 95% CI. RESULTS: The meta-analysis comprised 22 trials: 11 assessed tapering and 7 addressed withdrawal (4 assessed both). Only trials with an RA or axial SpA (axSpA) population were identified. An increased flare risk was demonstrated when b-/tsDMARD tapering was compared with continuation [RR 1.45 (95% CI 1.19, 1.77), I2 = 42.5%] and potentially increased for persistent flare [POR 1.56 (95% CI 0.97, 2.52), I2 = 0%]. Comparing TNF inhibitor (TNFi) withdrawal with continuation, a highly increased flare risk [RR 2.28 (95% CI 1.78, 2.93), I2 = 78%] and increased odds of persistent flare [POR 3.41 (95% CI 1.91, 6.09), I2 = 49%] were observed. No clear difference in flare risk between RA or axSpA was observed. CONCLUSION: A high risk for flare and persistent flare was demonstrated for TNFi withdrawal, whereas an increased risk for flare but not for persistent flare was observed for b-/tsDMARD tapering. Thus tapering seems to be the more favourable approach. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42019136905).

New-onset versus relapsing giant cell arteritis treated with tocilizumab: 3-year results from a randomized controlled trial and extension.

OBJECTIVE: Tocilizumab plus prednisone induces sustained glucocorticoid-free remission in patients with GCA. However, its long-term benefits in new-onset vs relapsing disease are uncertain, and the value of weekly vs every-other-week dosing has not been evaluated. METHODS: In Giant-Cell Arteritis Actemra (GiACTA) part 1, patients with new-onset or relapsing GCA received blinded tocilizumab weekly (TCZ QW), tocilizumab every-other-week (TCZ Q2W) or placebo for 52 weeks, with a prednisone taper. In part 2 (open-label), patients were treated at investigator discretion for 104 weeks. In this analysis, patients were evaluated according to their original treatment assignments, and outcomes beyond 52 weeks were assessed. Outcomes of interest included time to first flare and cumulative glucocorticoid exposure over 3 years according to baseline disease status. RESULTS: Part 1 enrolled 250 patients; 215 entered part 2. At baseline, 48% had new-onset disease and 52% had relapsing disease. In patients with new-onset and relapsing disease, the median time to first flare in the TCZ QW group was 577 and 575 days, respectively, vs 479 and 428 days with TCZ Q2W and 179 and 224 days with placebo; the median cumulative glucocorticoid dose was 3068 mg and 2191 mg with TCZ QW, 4080 mg and 2353 mg with TCZ Q2W, and 4639 mg and 6178 mg with placebo. CONCLUSION: TCZ QW delayed the time to flare and reduced the cumulative glucocorticoid dose in patients with relapsing GCA and new-onset GCA. These data support initiating TCZ QW as part of first-line therapy in all patients with active GCA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01791153.

Relationship of anifrolumab pharmacokinetics with efficacy and safety in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the relationship of anifrolumab pharmacokinetics with efficacy and safety in patients with moderate to severe SLE despite standard therapy, using pooled data from two phase 3 trials. METHODS: TULIP-1 and TULIP-2 were randomized, placebo-controlled, 52-week trials of intravenous anifrolumab (every 4 weeks for 48 weeks). For the exposure-response analysis, BILAG-based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) or SLE Responder Index [SRI(4)] response rates at week 52 in each quartile/tertile of average anifrolumab serum concentration (Cave) were compared for anifrolumab and placebo in all-comers, patients who completed treatment, and IFN gene signature (IFNGS)-high patients who completed treatment, using average marginal effect logistic regression. Relationships between exposure and key safety events were assessed graphically. RESULTS: Of patients in TULIP-1/TULIP-2 who received anifrolumab (150 mg, n = 91; 300 mg, n = 356) or placebo (n = 366), 574 completed treatment, of whom 470 were IFNGS high. In the exposure-efficacy analyses, BICLA and SRI(4) treatment differences favouring anifrolumab 300 mg vs placebo were observed across Cave subgroups and all analysis populations. Logistic regression identified Cave as a significant covariate for predicted BICLA response, as higher anifrolumab Cave predicted greater efficacy. There was no evidence of exposure-driven incidence of key safety events through week 52 in patients receiving anifrolumab 150 or 300 mg. CONCLUSION: While higher Cave predicted greater efficacy, consistent positive benefit favouring anifrolumab 300 mg vs placebo was observed in BICLA and SRI(4) responses across Cave subgroups in the TULIP trials. There was no evidence of exposure-driven safety events. CLINICALTRIAL.GOV NUMBERS: NCT02446912, NCT02446899.

Retrospective Database Analysis: Dose Escalation and Adherence in Patients Initiating Biologics for Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: Biologic therapies are often used in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who are nonresponsive to conventional treatments. However, nonresponse or loss of response to biologics often occurs, leading to dose escalation, combination therapy, and/or treatment switching. We investigated real-world treatment patterns of biologic therapies among patients with UC in the USA. METHODS: This study analyzed data from the IBM® MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases (medical/pharmacy claims for >250 million patients in the USA) to identify patients with UC initiating a biologic therapy (adalimumab, infliximab, golimumab, or vedolizumab) with 12 months of follow-up post-initiation. Key measures were patient baseline characteristics, dose escalation (average maintenance dose >20% higher than label), adherence (proportion of days covered), and ulcerative colitis-related healthcare costs in the 12 months following biologic therapy initiation. RESULTS: Of 2,331 patients included in the study (adalimumab [N = 1,291], infliximab [N = 810], golimumab [N = 127], and vedolizumab [N = 103]), 28.1% used concomitant immunosuppressant therapy within 12 months post-initiation. Overall, 23.6% (adalimumab), 34.8% (infliximab), 9.9% (golimumab), and 39.2% (vedolizumab) of patients dose escalated within 12 months. Patients who dose escalated incurred USD 20,106 higher total UC-related healthcare costs over 12 months than those who did not. Adherence (covariate-adjusted proportion of days covered) ranged from 0.63 to 0.73, and 39.3% of patients discontinued within 12 months (median treatment duration = 112 days). CONCLUSION: Dose escalation was common, and incurred higher costs, in patients with UC initiating biologic therapies. Suboptimal adherence and/or discontinuation within 12 months of initiation occurred frequently, highlighting the challenges in managing these patients.

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and practical points in psoriasis patients: A narrative review.

SARS-CoV2 vaccines were approved without long-term monitoring due to emergent situations. This has raised some issues about timing and protocol of receiving vaccines in specific situations including patients with chronic inflammatory disorders such as psoriasis. Here, we present different aspects of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in psoriasis patients and aim to provide solutions to overcome the potential challenges. In brief, the benefits of vaccination outweigh the potential risk; vaccine-triggered de novo or flares of psoriasis is uncommon. As such, all psoriasis patients, especially those receiving systemic treatments including anti tumor necrosis factor agents, are strongly recommended to get SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. It is recommended that new immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory therapies be initiated at least 1 week after the second SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose, if possible. In addition, in severe and active forms of psoriasis, it is better to delay vaccination until stabilization of the disease.

Biologics combined with conventional systemic agents for the treatment of children with severe psoriasis. Real-life data from the BiPe cohorts and a practice survey among French and Italian pediatric dermatologists.

Combined therapies involve the use of multiple drugs to increase efficacy and reduce the toxicity of individual treatments. We evaluated the use of combinations of conventional systemic therapies and biologics in children with psoriasis in daily practice. This two-part study used data from the 170 children in the Franco-Italian BiPe cohorts to evaluate the use, efficacy, and safety of combined conventional systemic-biologic therapies, and from a survey carried out among French and Italian dermatologists to better understand the reasons for using or avoiding these combinations. In total, 33 children (19.4%) from 13 dermatology centers received 48 combined conventional systemic-biologic therapies (cumulative duration: 43.6 years), including three triple combination therapies (acitretin-methotrexate, with a TNF-alpha inhibitor). A total of 14 different combinations were used, most frequently etanercept-acitretin (n = 10), adalimumab-acitretin (n = 7), adalimumab-methotrexate (n = 5), and ustekinumab-methotrexate (n = 5). The combined therapies were started at biologic initiation in 41 cases (85.4%), and after a period of biologic monotherapy in the remaining 7 cases. Mean PGA and PASI scores decreased between baseline and M3 with all the combinations used. Four serious adverse events were reported, all with favorable outcomes. The survey was completed by 61 dermatologists: 39 (63.9%) had previously used or planned to use the combined therapies, most commonly TNF-alpha inhibitors with acitretin or methotrexate. The main reason for using these treatments was to improve the outcome of biologic therapies in cases of partial efficacy or loss of efficacy. Combined therapies have been used frequently in the treatment of childhood psoriasis, in a range of clinical situations and in variable drug combinations, without significant toxicity. Although the use of these combined therapies needs to be clarified in future management guidelines, these combined therapies should be considered for the treatment of children with severe psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and recalcitrant disease.

Rapidity of clinical response to adalimumab and improvement of quality of life in luminal Crohn's disease: RAPIDA study.

OBJECTIVE: No studies evaluating the rapidity of response to biological therapies are available for Crohn's disease (CD). The aim of this study was to evaluate rapidity of onset of clinical response and impact on quality of life (QoL) of adalimumab therapy in adult anti-TNF-naïve patients with moderately-to-severely active CD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: RAPIDA was an open-label, single-arm, prospective, multicenter clinical trial. Adult patients with moderately-to-severely active luminal CD, anti-TNF-naïve, and unresponsive to conventional therapy were treated with adalimumab. Clinical disease activity, QoL and inflammatory biomarkers were measured at day 4, and weeks 1, 2, 4, and 12 after treatment initiation. RESULTS: Eighty-six patients were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses. Clinical disease activity was reduced from a median of 9.0 points to 6.0 points at day 4. Clinical response (≥ 3-point reduction in the Harvey-Bradshaw Index, HBI) was achieved by 61.6% (d4) and 75.6% (w1) of patients in the ITT population (median 2.5 days) and with non-responder imputation (NRI), by 55.8% and 53.4%, respectively. The proportion of patients in clinical remission (HBI<5) at weeks 2 and 4 in the ITT population was 54.7% and 62.8%, respectively (median 7.0 days), and 38.4% and 45.3% in the NRI population. All QoL scores significantly improved and inflammatory biomarkers significantly decreased from day 4 onwards (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Rapid clinical response and remission, improvement in QoL and fatigue, and a reduction of inflammatory biomarkers were achieved with adalimumab as early as day 4 in adult anti-TNF-naïve patients with moderately-to-severely active CD.