Molecular characterisation of lupus low disease activity state (LLDAS) and DORIS remission by whole-blood transcriptome-based pathways in a pan-European systemic lupus erythematosus cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To unveil biological milieus underlying low disease activity (LDA) and remission versus active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS: We determined differentially expressed pathways (DEPs) in SLE patients from the PRECISESADS project (NTC02890121) stratified into patients fulfilling and not fulfilling the criteria of (1) Lupus LDA State (LLDAS), (2) Definitions of Remission in SLE remission, and (3) LLDAS exclusive of remission. RESULTS: We analysed data from 321 patients; 40.8% were in LLDAS, and 17.4% in DORIS remission. After exclusion of patients in remission, 28.3% were in LLDAS. Overall, 604 pathways differed significantly in LLDAS versus non-LLDAS patients with an false-discovery rate-corrected p (q)<0.05 and a robust effect size (dr)≥0.36. Accordingly, 288 pathways differed significantly between DORIS remitters and non-remitters (q<0.05 and dr≥0.36). DEPs yielded distinct molecular clusters characterised by differential serological, musculoskeletal, and renal activity. Analysis of partially overlapping samples showed no DEPs between LLDAS and DORIS remission. Drug repurposing potentiality for treating SLE was unveiled, as were important pathways underlying active SLE whose modulation could aid attainment of LLDAS/remission, including toll-like receptor (TLR) cascades, Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) activity, the cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4)-related inhibitory signalling, and the nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain leucine-rich repeat-containing protein 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome pathway. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated for the first time molecular signalling pathways distinguishing LLDAS/remission from active SLE. LLDAS/remission was associated with reversal of biological processes related to SLE pathogenesis and specific clinical manifestations. DEP clustering by remission better grouped patients compared with LLDAS, substantiating remission as the ultimate treatment goal in SLE; however, the lack of substantial pathway differentiation between the two states justifies LLDAS as an acceptable goal from a biological perspective.

Different Therapeutic Response to Anti-TNF Drugs in Patients with Axial Spondyloarthritis Depending on Their Clinical Profile: An Unsupervised Cluster Analysis.

Background: The objectives were as follows: (a) to identify, among patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), "clusters" of patients based on the presence of peripheral and extra-musculoskeletal manifestations (EMMs) and (b) to compare the effectiveness of the first anti-TNF drugs across the different clusters after 6 months of follow-up. Methods: An observational and retrospective study of 90 axSpA patients naïve to bDMARDs was conducted. An unsupervised cluster analysis using the "k-means" technique was performed using variables of peripheral and EMMs. Baseline clinical and sociodemographic characteristics were evaluated, and the response to anti-TNF treatment (considering responders as those with an improvement ≥1.1 for the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) or ≥2.0 for the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI)) was compared across the clusters after 6 months of follow-up. Results: Two clusters were identified: cluster 1 (n = 14), with a higher prevalence of peripheral manifestations, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and HLA-B27-positive status, and a lower prevalence of uveitis in comparison with cluster 2 (n = 76). Patients from cluster 1 experienced a more pronounced absolute improvement in ASDAS and BASDAI indices after 6 months. The percentage of responders after 6 months of follow-up was superior in cluster 1 compared to cluster 2 (85.7% vs. 48.7%, p = 0.011). Conclusion: This study suggests the existence of two clinical profiles in axSpA patients according to the peripheral and EMMs, with higher rates of anti-TNF effectiveness after 6 months in those with a greater presence of peripheral features.

Impact of multimorbidity on the first ts/bDMARD effectiveness and retention rate after two years of follow-up in patients with rheumatoid arthritis from the BIOBADASER registry.

BACKGROUND: Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) have a higher prevalence of comorbidities compared to the general population. However, the implications of multimorbidity on therapeutic response and treatment retention remain unexplored. OBJECTIVES: (a) To evaluate the impact of multimorbidity on the effectiveness of the first targeted synthetic or biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (ts/bDMARD), in patients with RA after 2-year follow-up; (b) to investigate the influence of multimorbidity on treatment retention rate. METHODS: Patients with RA from the BIOBADASER registry exposed to a first ts/bDMARDs were included. Patients were categorized based on multimorbidity status at baseline, defined as a Charlson Comorbidity index (CCI) score ≥ 3. A linear regression model, adjusted for sex and age, was employed to compare the absolute DAS28 score over time after ts/bDMARD initiation between the two groups. The Log-Rank test and Kaplan-Meier curve were used to compare the retention rates of the first ts/bDMARD between the groups. RESULTS: A total of 1128 patients initiating ts/bDMARD were included, with 107 (9.3%) exhibiting multimorbidity. The linear regression model showed significantly higher DAS28 (beta coefficient 0.33, 95%CI:0.07-0.58) over a two-year period in patients with multimorbidity, even after adjusting for age and sex. Finally, no differences in the ts/bDMARD retention rate were found between groups (median 6.94-6.96 years in CCI < 3 vs. 5.68-5.62 in CCI ≥ 3; p = 0.610). CONCLUSIONS: Multimorbidity in patients with RA was associated with greater DAS28 scores within the first two years after ts/bDMARD initiation, in comparison with patients without multimorbidity. A slightly shorter retention rate was found in patients with multimorbidity, although the difference was non-significant.

Exploring the influence of baseline rheumatoid factor levels on TNF inhibitor retention rate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a multicentre and retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the retention rate of certolizumab pegol (CZP) was longer than that of other tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) based on baseline rheumatoid factor (RF) levels. METHODS: Longitudinal, retrospective and multicentre study including patients with RA who were treated with any TNFi (monoclonal antibodies (mAB), etanercept (ETA) or CZP). Log-rank test and Cox regressions were conducted to evaluate the retention rate in the three groups according to the level of RF, with the third quartile of the baseline levels used as cut-off: <200 (

Exploring candidate biomarkers for rheumatoid arthritis through cardiovascular and cardiometabolic serum proteome profiling.

Introduction: RA patients are at higher risk of cardiovascular disease, influenced by therapies. Studying their cardiovascular and cardiometabolic proteome can unveil biomarkers and insights into related biological pathways. Methods: This study included two cohorts of RA patients: newly diagnosed individuals (n=25) and those with established RA (disease duration >25 years, n=25). Both cohorts were age and sex-matched with a control group (n=25). Additionally, a longitudinal investigation was conducted on a cohort of 25 RA patients treated with methotrexate and another cohort of 25 RA patients treated with tofacitinib for 6 months. Clinical and analytical variables were recorded, and serum profiling of 184 proteins was performed using the Olink technology platform. Results: RA patients exhibited elevated levels of 75 proteins that might be associated with cardiovascular disease. In addition, 24 proteins were increased in RA patients with established disease. Twenty proteins were commonly altered in both cohorts of RA patients. Among these, elevated levels of CTSL1, SORT1, SAA4, TNFRSF10A, ST6GAL1 and CCL18 discriminated RA patients and HDs with high specificity and sensitivity. Methotrexate treatment significantly reduced the levels of 13 proteins, while tofacitinib therapy modulated the expression of 10 proteins. These reductions were associated with a decrease in DAS28. Baseline levels of SAA4 and high levels of BNP were associated to the non-response to methotrexate. Changes in IL6 levels were specifically linked to the response to methotrexate. Regarding tofacitinib, differences in baseline levels of LOX1 and CNDP1 were noted between non-responder and responder RA patients. In addition, response to tofacitinib correlated with changes in SAA4 and TIMD4 levels. Conclusion: In summary, this study pinpoints molecular changes linked to cardiovascular disease in RA and proposes candidate protein biomarkers for distinguishing RA patients from healthy individuals. It also highlights how methotrexate and tofacitinib impact these proteins, with distinct alterations corresponding to each drug's response, identifying potential candidates, as SAA4, for the response to these therapies.

Personalized cardiovascular risk assessment in Rheumatoid Arthritis patients using circulating molecular profiles and their modulation by TNFi, IL6Ri, and JAKinibs.

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to: 1) analyze the inflammatory profile of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) patients, identifying clinical phenotypes associated with cardiovascular (CV) risk; 2) evaluate biologic and targeted-synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b-DMARDs and ts-DMARDs': TNFi, IL6Ri, JAKinibs) effects; and 3) characterize molecular mechanisms in immune-cell activation and endothelial dysfunction. PATIENTS & METHODS: A total of 387 RA patients and 45 healthy donors were recruited, forming three cohorts: i) 208 RA patients with established disease but without previous CV events; ii) RA-CVD: 96 RA patients with CV events, and iii) 83 RA patients treated with b-DMARDs/ts-DMARDs for 6 months. Serum inflammatory profiles (cytokines/chemokines/growth factors) and NETosis/oxidative stress-linked biomolecules were evaluated. Mechanistic in vitro studies were performed on monocytes, neutrophils and endothelial cells (EC). RESULTS: In the first RA-cohort, unsupervised clustering unveiled three distinct groups: cluster 3 (C3) displayed the highest inflammatory profile, significant CV-risk score, and greater atheroma plaques prevalence. In contrast, cluster 1 (C1) exhibited the lowest inflammatory profile and CV risk score, while cluster 2 (C2) displayed an intermediate phenotype. Notably, 2nd cohort RA-CVD patients mirrored C3's inflammation. Treatment with b-DMARDs or ts-DMARDs effectively reduced disease-activity scores (DAS28) and restored normal biomolecules levels, controlling CV risk. In vitro, serum from C3-RA or RA-CVD patients increased neutrophils activity and CV-related protein levels in cultured monocytes and EC, which were partially prevented by pre-incubation with TNFi, IL6Ri, and JAKinibs. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, analyzing circulating molecular profiles in RA patients holds potential for personalized clinical management, addressing CV risk and assisting healthcare professionals in tailoring treatment, ultimately improving outcomes.