HLA-DQA1∗05 Genotype and Immunogenicity to Tumor Necrosis Factor-α Antagonists: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Identifying patients at high risk of immunogenicity is important when selecting tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α antagonists in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). We evaluated the association HLA-DQA1∗05 genotype and risk of immunogenicity with TNF-α antagonists. METHODS: Through a systematic review through July 14, 2022, we identified studies in patients with IMIDs treated with TNF-α antagonists, which reported the risk of immunogenicity and/or secondary loss of response in patients with HLA-DQA1∗05 variants. Primary outcome was risk of immunogenicity. We performed random effects meta-analysis and used GRADE to appraise certainty of evidence. RESULTS: On meta-analysis of 13 studies (3756 patients; median follow-up, 12 months; 41% with variants), HLA-DQA1∗05 variants were associated with 75% higher risk of immunogenicity compared with non-carriers (relative risk, 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.37-2.25) with considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 62%) (low certainty evidence). Positive and negative predictive values of HLA-DQA1∗05 variants for predicting immunogenicity were 30% and 80%, respectively. Proactive therapeutic drug monitoring, but not concomitant use of IMMs, IMIDs, and TNF-α antagonist-type, modified this association. Patients with HLA-DQA1∗05 variants experienced 2.2-fold higher risk of secondary loss of response (6 cohorts; relative risk, 2.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.67-3.00; I2 = 0%) (moderate certainty evidence). CONCLUSION: Variants in HLA-DQA1∗05 are associated with an increased risk in immunogenicity and secondary loss of response in patients with IMIDs treated with TNF-α antagonists. However, the positive and negative predictive value is moderate, and decisions on concomitant use of IMMs to prevent immunogenicity should be individualized based on all factors that influence drug clearance.

Proactive Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Versus Conventional Management for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Proactive therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) has been proposed to improve outcomes in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treated with tumor necrosis factor (TNF)α antagonists. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing proactive TDM with conventional management in patients with IBD. METHODS: We identified RCTs in patients with IBD treated with TNFα antagonists comparing proactive TDM (routine assessments of trough concentration with dose adjustments to maintain predetermined trough concentration, regardless of disease activity) with conventional management (clinically driven dose adjustments). The primary outcome was failure to maintain clinical remission. Certainty of evidence was appraised using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations. RESULTS: On meta-analysis of 9 RCTs (8 RCTs in adults, and focusing on maintenance phase), there was no significant difference in the risk of failing to maintain clinical remission in patients who underwent proactive TDM (267/709; 38%) vs conventional management (292/696; 42%) (relative risk [RR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-1.13) with moderate heterogeneity (inconsistency index = 36%) (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations; low certainty evidence), with no differences in patients with Crohn's disease (RR, 0.87 ; 95% CI, 0.66-1.15) and ulcerative colitis (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.72-1.07). Disease duration, concomitant immunomodulators, disease activity at baseline, and optimization of therapy before randomization did not modify this association. No differences were observed in risk of developing antidrug antibodies or serious adverse events. Patients in the proactive TDM arm were more likely to undergo dose escalation (RR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.25-1.94). CONCLUSIONS: Routine proactive TDM to target biologic concentration to specific thresholds, regardless of disease activity, did not offer clinical benefit in patients with IBD treated with TNFα antagonists in RCTs conducted to date. We cannot exclude the possibility of benefit in disease subtypes and phases of therapy (induction) not represented in these RCT populations.

Immunogenicity and Safety of Standard and Third-Dose SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Patients Receiving Immunosuppressive Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Immunogenicity and safety following receipt of the standard SARS-CoV-2 vaccination regimen in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) are poorly characterized, and data after receipt of the third vaccine dose are lacking. The aim of the study was to evaluate serologic responses and adverse events following the standard 2-dose regimen and a third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in IMID patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy. METHODS: Adult patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy for rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis, psoriatic arthritis, Crohn's disease, or ulcerative colitis, as well as healthy adult controls, who received the standard 2-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccination regimen were included in this prospective observational study. Analyses of antibodies to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein were performed prior to and 2-4 weeks after vaccination. Patients with a weak serologic response, defined as an IgG antibody titer of ≤100 arbitrary units per milliliter (AU/ml) against the receptor-binding domain of the full-length SARS-Cov-2 spike protein, were allotted a third vaccine dose. RESULTS: A total of 1,505 patients (91%) and 1,096 healthy controls (98%) had a serologic response to the standard regimen (P < 0.001). Anti-RBD antibody levels were lower in patients (median 619 AU/ml interquartile range [IQR] 192-4,191) than in controls (median 3,355 AU/ml [IQR 896-7,849]) (P < 0.001). The proportion of responders was lowest among patients receiving tumor necrosis factor inhibitor combination therapy, JAK inhibitors, or abatacept. Younger age and receipt of messenger RNA-1273 vaccine were predictors of serologic response. Of 153 patients who had a weak response to the standard regimen and received a third dose, 129 (84%) became responders. The vaccine safety profile among patients and controls was comparable. CONCLUSION: IMID patients had an attenuated response to the standard vaccination regimen as compared to healthy controls. A third vaccine dose was safe and resulted in serologic response in most patients. These data facilitate identification of patient groups at risk of an attenuated vaccine response, and they support administering a third vaccine dose to IMID patients with a weak serologic response to the standard regimen.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of infliximab compared to standard clinical treatment with infliximab: study protocol for a randomised, controlled, open, parallel-group, phase IV study (the NOR-DRUM study).

BACKGROUND: Infliximab (INX) and other tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) have revolutionised the treatment of several immune mediated inflammatory diseases. Still, many patients do not respond sufficiently to therapy or lose efficacy over time. The large interindividual variation in serum drug concentrations on standard doses and the development of anti-drug antibodies are thought to be major reasons for treatment failures. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), an individualised treatment strategy based on systematic assessments of serum drug concentrations, has been proposed as a clinical tool to optimise efficacy of INX treatment. TDM seems reasonable both from a clinical and an economical point of view, but the effectiveness of this treatment strategy has not yet been demonstrated in randomised clinical trials. The NORwegian DRUg Monitoring study (NOR-DRUM) aims to assess the effectiveness of TDM, both with regard to the achievement of remission in patients starting INX treatment (part A) as well as to maintain disease control in patients on INX treatment (part B). METHODS: The NOR-DRUM study is a randomised, open, controlled, parallel-group, comparative, multi-centre, national, superiority, phase IV study with two separate parts, NOR-DRUM A and NOR-DRUM B. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, spondyloarthritis, ulcerative colitis, Crohn's disease and psoriasis are included. In both study parts participants are randomised 1:1 to either TDM of infliximab (intervention group) or to standard treatment with infliximab without knowledge of drug levels or ADAb status (control group). NOR-DRUM A will include 400 patients starting INX therapy. The primary outcome is remission at 30 weeks. In NOR-DRUM B, 450 patients on maintenance treatment with INX will be included. The primary endpoint is occurrence of disease worsening during the 52-week study period. DISCUSSION: As the first trial to assess the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of TDM in patients receiving TNFi for a range of immune mediated inflammatory diseases, we hope that the NOR-DRUM study will contribute to the advancement of evidence based personalised treatment with biological medicines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03074656. Registered on 090317.

Proposal for levels of evidence schema for validation of a soluble biomarker reflecting damage endpoints in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis, and recommendations for study design.

OBJECTIVE: At OMERACT 8 a framework for levels of evidence was proposed for the validation of biomarkers as surrogate outcome measures. We aimed to adapt this scheme in order to apply it in the setting of soluble biomarkers proposed to replace the measurement of damage endpoints in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). We also aimed to generate consensus on minimum standards for the design of longitudinal studies aimed at validating biomarkers. METHODS: Before the meeting, the Soluble Biomarker Working Group prepared a preliminary framework and discussed various models for association and prediction related to the statistical strength domain. In addition, 3 Delphi exercises addressing longitudinal study design for RA, PsA, and AS were conducted within the working group and members of the Assessments in SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) and the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA). This formed the basis for discussions among OMERACT 9 participants. RESULTS: The proposed framework was accepted by consensus. In the study design domain a requirement for both prospective observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCT) in different drug classes was noted. A template for determining the level of statistical strength was proposed. The addition of a new domain on biomarker assay performance was considered essential, and participants suggested that for any biomarker this domain should be addressed first, i.e., before starting clinical validation studies. Participants agreed on most elements of a longitudinal study design template. Where consensus was lacking the working group has drafted solutions that constitute a basis for prospective validation studies. CONCLUSION: The OMERACT 9 Soluble Biomarker Group has successfully formulated a levels of evidence scheme and a study design template that will provide guidance to conduct validation studies in the setting of soluble biomarkers proposed to replace the measurement of damage endpoints in RA, PsA, and AS.

Cartilage and bone biomarkers in rheumatoid arthritis: prediction of 10-year radiographic progression.

OBJECTIVE: As current predictors of joint destruction have low specificity, serological biomarkers reflecting bone and cartilage destruction have been proposed as tools in assessing prognosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We examined whether serum concentrations of a panel of biomarkers could predict radiographic progression in patients with RA. METHODS: A cohort of 238 patients with RA was followed longitudinally for 10 years with collection of clinical data and serum samples. These analyses focus on the 136 patients with radiographs of the hands available at baseline and at 5 and/or 10 years. Radiographs were scored according to the van der Heijde-modified Sharp score (SHS). Baseline sera were analyzed for receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappaB ligand (RANKL), osteoprotegerin (OPG), human cartilage glycoprotein-39 (YKL-40), C2C, collagen cross-linked C-telopeptide (CTX-I), and cartilage oligomeric matrix protein (COMP). Multivariate linear and logistic regression analyses were used to identify predictors of radiographic progression. RESULTS: Baseline CTX-I levels were higher in progressors [0.41 ng/ml (interquartile range 0.31-0.75)] than in nonprogressors [0.32 ng/ml (IQR 0.21-0.49)], and were independently associated with 10-year change in radiographic damage score [ss = 16.4 (IQR 5.7-27.1)]. We found no association between radiographic progression and baseline serum levels of RANKL, OPG, C2C, YKL-40, or COMP. CONCLUSION: This longterm followup study of patients with RA indicates a relationship between elevated CTX-I levels in serum and subsequent joint destruction. This association was, however, weak, and our study does not support that serum CTX-I or any of the other tested biomarkers will serve as more useful prognostic markers than current predictors such as anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide, radiographic damage early in the disease course, and signs of inflammation.