Impact of high rheumatoid factor levels on treatment outcomes with certolizumab pegol and adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of baseline rheumatoid factor (RF) level on drug concentrations and efficacy of certolizumab pegol (CZP; tumour necrosis factor inhibitor [TNFi] without a crystallisable fragment [Fc]) and adalimumab (ADA; Fc-containing TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: The phase 4 EXXELERATE study (NCT01500278) was a 104-week, randomised, single-blind (double-blind until week 12; investigator-blind thereafter), head-to-head study of CZP vs ADA in patients with RA. In this post hoc analysis, we report drug concentration and efficacy outcomes stratified by baseline RF quartile (≤Q3 or >Q3). RESULTS: Baseline data by RF quartiles were available for 453 CZP-randomised and 454 ADA-randomised patients (≤Q3: ≤204 IU/ml; >Q3: >204 IU/ml). From week 12, the area under the curve (AUC) of ADA concentration was lower in patients with RF > 204 IU/ml vs patients with RF ≤ 204 IU/ml; the AUC of CZP concentration was similar in patients with RF ≤ 204 IU/ml and >204 IU/ml. For patients with RF ≤ 204 IU/ml, disease activity score (DAS28)-C-reactive protein (CRP) was similar between CZP- and ADA-treated patients through week 104. For patients with RF > 204 IU/ml, mean DAS28-CRP was lower in CZP- vs ADA-treated patients at week 104. The proportion of patients with RF > 204 IU/ml achieving DAS28-CRP low disease activity at week 104 was greater in CZP- vs ADA-treated patients. CONCLUSION: CZP was associated with maintained drug concentration and efficacy in patients with RA and high RF and may therefore be a more suitable therapeutic option than TNFis with an Fc fragment in these patients.

Sex-Specific Differences in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: A systematic review of published literature was conducted to collate evidence on sex-specific differences in clinical characteristics, disease activity, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), including response to treatment. METHODS: Searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were performed in November 2020 for observational studies of adults with PsA reporting outcomes by sex (published from January 1, 2015, to November 13, 2020). In addition, hand searches of systematic literature reviews and (network) metaanalysis bibliographies were performed. Searches of ClinicalTrials.gov and congress abstracts from the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology, the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), and the American Academy of Dermatology (2019-2020) were also carried out. Eligible studies with 100 or more patients prespecified a comparison by sex and reported clinical characteristics and/or disease activity. Data extracted included patient characteristics, study design, baseline clinical characteristics, and disease activity results, including PROs. RESULTS: Database searching yielded 3283 unique records; 31 publications of 27 unique studies were included. The review found generally higher rates of peripheral disease in women, including higher tender joint counts. There was some evidence of more axial disease in men, plus greater skin disease burden. There were consistently no differences in Dermatology Life Quality Index scores, though across other PROs, women had worse scores, including pain and fatigue. Women had poorer responses to treatment, indicated by outcome measures such as ACR responses and minimal disease activity. CONCLUSION: This review indicates that important differences exist between the sexes in PsA. However, the limited evidence for this conclusion underlines the need for additional research in this area.

Evaluating the relationship of blood pressure, plasma angiotensin peptides and aldosterone with cognitive functions in patients with hypertension.

Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone System (RAAS) plays an important role in the development of hypertension. On the other hand, hypertension is a well-known and independent risk factor for cognitive impairment. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the relationship of blood pressure control, plasma angiotensin peptides and aldosterone with cognitive functions. Forty-one patients who were under treatment with the same antihypertensive medications for at least three months were included in the study. Plasma angiotensin II, angiotensin 1-7, angiotensin IV, and aldosterone concentrations were analyzed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Standardized Mini Mental State Examination (SMMSE) was used to evaluate cognitive functions. When the participants were grouped according to their SMMSE scores (cut-off value: 26 points), we determined significant differences between systolic blood pressure (SBP) levels, diastolic blood pressure levels, plasma angiotensin II and angiotensin 1-7 concentrations of the groups. When the participants were stratified according to their SBP levels (cut-off value: 140 mm Hg), we found significant differences in SMMSE scores and plasma angiotensin IV concentrations of the groups. A negative correlation between SBP and SMMSE scores and strong linear correlations among angiotensin peptides levels were determined. The relationship found between SBP and SMMSE in the present study was compatible with the literature. Our 33 patients were using at least one angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB). Regarding AT1 receptor blockage, the significant association between higher SMMSE scores and increased angiotensin peptides may support a finding that ARBs prevent dementia and improve cognitive function. Further larger studies are needed to confirm and prove the relation of RAAS biochemical parameters with cognitive function.

Renin inhibitors in diabetes and hypertension: an update.

The coexistence of hypertension and diabetes increases the incidence of cardiovascular events and long-term morbidity and mortality. Blood pressure should be controlled with the most appropriate drugs as well as tight blood glucose control in patients with diabetes and hypertension. RAAS (Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone System) blockers have an important role in the treatment of these patients, in this sense, ACEi and ARB remained the major treatment option in hypertension guidelines. The most recent RAAS blocker to be approved by the FDA was aliskiren in 2007, a renin inhibitor. Studies showed that aliskiren is as effective as other antihypertensive drugs and has a safety profile similar to placebo. The potent renin inhibitor aliskiren directly inhibits the RAAS system at its rate limiting step and differently from other RAAS blockers; it decreases plasma renin activity (PRA). Although the relationship of increased PRA levels and cardiovascular risk has been shown, it is unclear if the PRA decrease provided by aliskiren has an impact on clinical outcomes and cardiovascular endpoints. On the other hand, large trials like ASPIRE, AVANT-GARDE, ALTITUDE, ASTRONAUT, which investigated the combination of aliskiren with other RAAS blockers, failed to show the expected outcomes or resulted with an increased incidence of adverse effects, which raised more questions. As a result of the ALTITUDE trial, combination of aliskiren with an ACEi or ARB is not recommended in patients with hypertension and diabetes, or at least moderate renal dysfunction. Trials designed to prove aliskiren's efficacy in new indications like diabetes, may face similar problems related to dual RAAS blockade because in the majority of cases, the optimal treatment is achieved with an ACEi or ARB. In this conjuncture, the increase in adverse events seen with aliskiren might be related to dual RAAS blockade rather than aliskiren directly. For instance, it is unclear whether the adverse event incidence would be the same, less, or higher if ALTITUDE was designed to investigate ACEi and ARB combination without aliskiren. In fact, every new molecular entity and mechanism of action faces the same barriers. For the time being, differentiating points like PRA lowering effects as an add-on therapy to calcium channel blockers or hydrochlorothiazide, and the populations that might have additional benefit, should be carefully investigated.