Tailoring the treatment of inflammatory rheumatic diseases by a better stratification and characterization of the clinical patient heterogeneity. Findings from a systematic literature review and experts' consensus.

Inflammatory rheumatic diseases are different pathologic conditions associated with a deregulated immune response, codified along a spectrum of disorders, with autoinflammatory and autoimmune diseases as two-end phenotypes of this continuum. Despite pathogenic differences, inflammatory rheumatic diseases are commonly managed with a limited number of immunosuppressive drugs, sometimes with partial evidence or transferring physicians' knowledge in different patients. In addition, several randomized clinical trials, enrolling these patients, did not meet the primary pre-established outcomes and these findings could be linked to the underlying molecular diversities along the spectrum of inflammatory rheumatic disorders. In fact, the resulting patient heterogeneity may be driven by differences in underlying molecular pathology also resulting in variable responses to immunosuppressive drugs. Thus, the identification of different clinical subsets may possibly overcome the major obstacles that limit the development more effective therapeutic strategies for these patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases. This clinical heterogeneity could require a diverse therapeutic management to improve patient outcomes and increase the frequency of clinical remission. Therefore, the importance of better patient stratification and characterization is increasingly pointed out according to the precision medicine principles, also suggesting a new approach for disease treatment. In fact, based on a better proposed patient profiling, clinicians could more appropriately balance the therapeutic management. On these bases, we synthetized and discussed the available literature about the patient profiling in regard to therapy in the context of inflammatory rheumatic diseases, mainly focusing on randomized clinical trials. We provided an overview of the importance of a better stratification and characterization of the clinical heterogeneity of patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases identifying this point as crucial in improving the management of these patients.

The Systemic Score May Identify Life-Threatening Evolution in Still Disease: Data from the GIRRCS AOSD-Study Group and the AIDA Network Still Disease Registry.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the clinical usefulness of the systemic score in the prediction of life-threatening evolution in Still disease. We also aimed to assess the clinical relevance of each component of the systemic score in predicting life-threatening evolution and to derive patient subsets accordingly. METHODS: A multicenter, observational, prospective study was designed including patients included in the Gruppo Italiano Di Ricerca in Reumatologia Clinica e Sperimentale Adult-Onset Still Disease Study Group and the Autoinflammatory Disease Alliance Network Still Disease Registry. Patients were assessed to see if the variables to derive the systemic score were available. The life-threatening evolution was defined as mortality, whatever the clinical course, and/or macrophage activation syndrome, a secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis associated with a poor prognosis. RESULTS: A total of 597 patients with Still disease were assessed (mean ± SD age 36.6 ± 17.3 years; male 44.4%). The systemic score, assessed as a continuous variable, significantly predicted the life-threatening evolution (odds ratio [OR] 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-1.42; P = 0.004). A systemic score ≥7 also significantly predicted the likelihood of a patient experiencing life-threatening evolution (OR 3.36; 95% CI 1.81-6.25; P < 0.001). Assessing the clinical relevance of each component of the systemic score, liver involvement (OR 1.68; 95% CI 1.48-2.67; P = 0.031) and lung disease (OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.14-4.49; P = 0.042) both significantly predicted life-threatening evolution. The clinical characteristics of patients with liver involvement and lung disease were derived, highlighting their relevance in multiorgan disease manifestations. CONCLUSION: The clinical utility of the systemic score was shown in identifying Still disease at a higher risk of life-threatening evolution in a large cohort. Furthermore, the clinical relevance of liver involvement and lung disease was highlighted.

The Evaluation of Effectiveness and Safety of Guselkumab in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis in a Prospective Multicentre "Real-Life" Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Guselkumab is an interleukin-23 (IL-23) inhibitor licensed for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This study aimed to evaluate the 6-month effectiveness of guselkumab in patients with PsA in a "real-life" multicentre patient cohort. We also estimated the drug retention rate (DRR) of gusulkumab, also assessing the impact of comorbidities and patient clinical characteristics, in a collective 18-month prospective follow-up. METHODS: Between December 2021 and September 2023, consecutive patients with PsA were evaluated if treated at least for 6 months with guselkumab in a prospective multicentre study to evaluate the effectiveness of the drug by means of disease activity index for psoriatic arthritis (DAPSA) and cumulative DRR. RESULTS: A total of 111 patients with PsA were evaluated and treated with guselkumab (age 56.8 ± 9.9, male sex 20.7%). These patients were mainly characterised by active and long-standing PsA with median disease duration of 6.0 (7.0) years (55.9% disease duration ≥ 5 years), 55.0% showed comorbidities, 78.4% of patients were previously treated with biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), and 60.4% concomitantly with conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs). After 6 months, a significant reduction of DAPSA was observed (ß - 15.47, p = 0.001, 95% CI - 23.15 to - 9.79) with 39.6% of patients achieving a DAPSA ≤ 14. At the end of cumulative follow-up, 71.2% of patients were still treated with guselkumab whereas 24.3% discontinued the drug because of inefficacy. An 18-month DRR of guselkumab of 66.7% was estimated with a mean time of administration of 9.8 ± 4.1 months. The results of the DRR were stratified according to patient clinical characteristics. The DRR of guselkumab appeared to be not influenced by long disease duration, comorbidities, obesity, concomitant csDMARDs, and previous bDMARDs. CONCLUSION: The "real-life" 6-month effectiveness of guselkumab was shown in patients with PsA, mainly characterised by active long-standing disease, previously treated with bDMARDs, and with comorbidities. Furthermore, a good DRR of guselkumab was estimated in the cumulative 18 months of follow-up and appeared to be not influenced by long disease duration, comorbidities, obesity, and previous bDMARDs.

The latest advances in the use of biological DMARDs to treat Still's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, the therapeutic management of Still's disease, a multisystemic inflammatory rare disorder, is directed to target the inflammatory symptoms and signs of patients. The treatment varies from glucocorticoids to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), both conventional synthetic and biological (bDMARDs). Usually, in refractory patients, bDMARDs are administered. AREAS COVERED: Among bDMARDs, IL-1 and IL-6 inhibitors are frequently used, as data reported from both clinical trials and 'real-life' experiences. Recently, innovative therapeutic strategies have suggested an early administration of bDMARDs to increase the rate of clinical response and drug-free remission. Some new targets have been also proposed targeting IL-18, IFN-γ, and JAK/STAT pathway, which could be applied to Still's disease and its life-threatening evolution. EXPERT OPINION: Many lines of evidence improved the knowledge about the therapeutic management of Still's disease with bDMARDs. However, many unmet needs may be still highlighted which could provide the basis to arrange further specific research in increasing the rate of clinical response. In fact, Still's disease remains a highly heterogeneous disease suggesting possible diverse underlying pathogenic mechanisms, at least partially, and consequent different therapeutic strategies. A better patient stratification may help in arranging specific studies to improve the long-term outcome of Still's disease.

The effects of suppressing inflammation by tofacitinib may simultaneously improve glycaemic parameters and inflammatory markers in rheumatoid arthritis patients with comorbid type 2 diabetes: a proof-of-concept, open, prospective, clinical study.

BACKGROUND: A consistent connection has been increasingly reported between rheumatoid arthritis (RA), insulin resistance (IR), and type 2 diabetes (T2D). The ß-cell apoptosis induced by pro-inflammatory cytokines, which could be exaggerated in the context of RA, is associated with increased expression pro-apoptotic proteins, which is dependent on JAnus Kinase/Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription (JAK/STAT) activation. On these bases, we aimed to evaluate if the administration of tofacitinib, a potent and selective JAK inhibitor, could simultaneously improve glycaemic parameters and inflammatory markers in patients with RA and comorbid T2D. METHODS: The primary endpoint was the change in the 1998-updated homeostatic model assessment of IR (HOMA2-IR) after 6 months of treatment with tofacitinib in RA patients with T2D. Consecutive RA patients with T2D diagnosis were included in this proof-of-concept, open, prospective, clinical study, which was planned before the recent emergence of safety signals about tofacitinib. Additional endpoints were also assessed regarding RA disease activity and metabolic parameters. RESULTS: Forty consecutive RA patients with T2D were included (female sex 68.9%, mean age of 63.4 ± 9.9 years). During 6-month follow-up, a progressive reduction of HOMA2-IR was observed in RA patients with T2D treated with tofacitinib. Specifically, a significant effect of tofacitinib was shown on the overall reduction of HOMA2-IR (ß = - 1.1, p = 0.019, 95%CI - 1.5 to - 0.76). Also, HOMA2-ß enhanced in these patients highlighting an improvement of insulin sensitivity. Furthermore, although a longer follow-up is required, a trend in glycated haemoglobin reduction was also recorded. The administration of tofacitinib induced an improvement in RA disease activity, and a significant reduction of DAS28-CRP and SDAI was observed; 76.8% of patients achieved a good clinical response. In this study, no major adverse events (AEs) were retrieved without the identification of new safety signals. Specifically, no life-threatening AEs and cardiovascular and/or thromboembolic events were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of tofacitinib in RA with T2D led to a simultaneous improvement of IR and inflammatory disease activity, inducing a "bidirectional" benefit in these patients. However, further specific designed and powered studies are warranted to entirely evaluate the metabolic effects of tofacitinib in RA patients with T2D.

Efficacy of canakinumab in patients with Still's disease across different lines of biologic therapy: real-life data from the International AIDA Network Registry for Still's Disease.

Introduction: The effectiveness of canakinumab may change according to the different times it is used after Still's disease onset. This study aimed to investigate whether canakinumab (CAN) shows differences in short- and long-term therapeutic outcomes, according to its use as different lines of biologic treatment. Methods: Patients included in this study were retrospectively enrolled from the AutoInflammatory Disease Alliance (AIDA) International Registry dedicated to Still's disease. Seventy-seven (51 females and 26 males) patients with Still's disease were included in the present study. In total, 39 (50.6%) patients underwent CAN as a first-line biologic agent, and the remaining 38 (49.4%) patients were treated with CAN as a second-line biologic agent or subsequent biologic agent. Results: No statistically significant differences were found between patients treated with CAN as a first-line biologic agent and those previously treated with other biologic agents in terms of the frequency of complete response (p =0.62), partial response (p =0.61), treatment failure (p >0.99), and frequency of patients discontinuing CAN due to lack or loss of efficacy (p =0.2). Of all the patients, 18 (23.4%) patients experienced disease relapse during canakinumab treatment, 9 patients were treated with canakinumab as a first-line biologic agent, and nine patients were treated with a second-line or subsequent biologic agent. No differences were found in the frequency of glucocorticoid use (p =0.34), daily glucocorticoid dosage (p =0.47), or concomitant methotrexate dosage (p =0.43) at the last assessment during CAN treatment. Conclusion: Canakinumab has proved to be effective in patients with Still's disease, regardless of its line of biologic treatment.