Evaluation of the oral corticosteroid-sparing effect of tezepelumab in adults with oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma (SOURCE): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Tezepelumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks the activity of thymic stromal lymphopoietin. SOURCE evaluated the oral corticosteroid-sparing effect of tezepelumab in adults with oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma. METHODS: We conducted this phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study across 60 sites in seven countries. Participants aged 18-80 years with physician-diagnosed asthma, who had been receiving medium-dose or high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and had at least one asthma exacerbation in the 12 months before screening were eligible. Patients who were receiving medium-dose inhaled corticosteroids must have had their dose increased to a high dose for at least 3 months before screening. After an oral corticosteroid optimisation phase of up to 8 weeks, participants were randomly assigned according to a computer-generated fixed block randomisation sequence to receive tezepelumab 210 mg or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks during a 48 week treatment period (4 week induction phase, 36 week oral corticosteroid reduction phase, and 8 week maintenance phase). Randomisation was stratified by region. Participants, investigators, and site staff were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the categorised percentage reduction from baseline in daily oral corticosteroid dose at week 48 without the loss of asthma control. Efficacy and safety endpoints were assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03406078. FINDINGS: Between March 5, 2018, and Sept 27, 2019, 150 participants were randomly assigned to receive tezepelumab 210 mg (n=74) or placebo (n=76). The cumulative odds of achieving a category of greater percentage reduction in an oral corticosteroid dose for daily maintenance at week 48 were similar with tezepelumab or placebo in the overall population (odds ratio [OR] 1·28 [95% CI 0·69-2·35], p=0·43; the primary endpoint was not met). The cumulative odds were higher with tezepelumab than with placebo in participants with baseline blood eosinophil counts of at least 150 cells per µL (2·58 [1·16-5·75]), but not in participants with counts below 150 cells per µL (0·40 [0·14-1·13]). Tezepelumab was well tolerated, with no safety concerns identified. 53 (72%) of 74 tezepelumab-assigned participants and 65 (86%) of 76 placebo-assigned participants reported an adverse event. Serious adverse events were reported in 12 (16%) participants in the tezepelumab group and 16 (21%) participants in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: We did not observe a significant improvement in oral corticosteroid dose reduction with tezepelumab versus placebo in the overall population of this oral corticosteroid-sparing study, although an improvement was observed in participants with baseline blood eosinophil counts of at least 150 cells per µL. FUNDING: AstraZeneca and Amgen.

Tezepelumab in Adults and Adolescents with Severe, Uncontrolled Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Tezepelumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks thymic stromal lymphopoietin, an epithelial-cell-derived cytokine implicated in the pathogenesis of asthma. The efficacy and safety of tezepelumab in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma require further assessment. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients (12 to 80 years of age) were randomly assigned to receive tezepelumab (210 mg) or placebo subcutaneously every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. The primary end point was the annualized rate of asthma exacerbations over a period of 52 weeks. This end point was also assessed in patients with baseline blood eosinophil counts of less than 300 cells per microliter. Secondary end points included the forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and scores on the Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 (ACQ-6; range, 0 [no impairment] to 6 [maximum impairment]), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ; range, 1 [maximum impairment] to 7 [no impairment]), and Asthma Symptom Diary (ASD; range, 0 [no symptoms] to 4 [worst possible symptoms]). RESULTS: Overall, 1061 patients underwent randomization (529 were assigned to receive tezepelumab and 532 to receive placebo). The annualized rate of asthma exacerbations was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.07) with tezepelumab and 2.10 (95% CI, 1.84 to 2.39) with placebo (rate ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.53; P<0.001). In patients with a blood eosinophil count of less than 300 cells per microliter, the annualized rate was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.84 to 1.23) with tezepelumab and 1.73 (95% CI, 1.46 to 2.05) with placebo (rate ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.75; P<0.001). At week 52, improvements were greater with tezepelumab than with placebo with respect to the prebronchodilator FEV1 (0.23 vs. 0.09 liters; difference, 0.13 liters; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.18; P<0.001) and scores on the ACQ-6 (-1.55 vs. -1.22; difference, -0.33; 95% CI, -0.46 to -0.20; P<0.001), AQLQ (1.49 vs. 1.15; difference, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.47; P<0.001), and ASD (-0.71 vs. -0.59; difference, -0.12; 95% CI, -0.19 to -0.04; P = 0.002). The frequencies and types of adverse events did not differ meaningfully between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma who received tezepelumab had fewer exacerbations and better lung function, asthma control, and health-related quality of life than those who received placebo. (Funded by AstraZeneca and Amgen; NAVIGATOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03347279.).

SOURCE: a phase 3, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tezepelumab in reducing oral corticosteroid use in adults with oral corticosteroid dependent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with severe asthma continue to experience asthma symptoms and exacerbations despite standard-of-care treatment. A substantial proportion of these patients require long-term treatment with oral corticosteroids (OCS), often at high doses, which are associated with considerable multiorgan adverse effects, including metabolic disorders, osteoporosis and adrenal insufficiency. Tezepelumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks the activity of the epithelial cytokine thymic stromal lymphopoietin. In the PATHWAY phase 2b study (NCT02054130), tezepelumab significantly reduced exacerbations by up to 71% in adults with severe, uncontrolled asthma. Several ongoing phase 3 trials (SOURCE, NCT03406078; NAVIGATOR, NCT03347279; DESTINATION, NCT03706079) are assessing the efficacy and safety of tezepelumab in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma. Here, we describe the design and objectives of SOURCE, a phase 3 OCS-sparing study. METHODS: SOURCE is an ongoing phase 3, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the effect of tezepelumab 210 mg administered subcutaneously every 4 weeks on OCS dose reduction in adults with OCS-dependent asthma. The study comprises a 2-week screening and enrolment period, followed by an OCS optimization phase of up to 8 weeks and a 48-week treatment period, which consists of a 4-week induction phase, followed by a 36-week OCS reduction phase and an 8-week maintenance phase. The primary objective is to assess the effect of tezepelumab compared with placebo in reducing the prescribed OCS maintenance dose. The key secondary objective is to assess the effect of tezepelumab on asthma exacerbation rates. Other secondary objectives include the proportion of patients with a reduction in OCS dose (100% or 50% reduction or those receiving < 5 mg) and the effect of tezepelumab on lung function and patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: SOURCE is evaluating the OCS-sparing potential of tezepelumab in patients with OCS-dependent asthma. SOURCE also aims to demonstrate that treatment with tezepelumab in patients with severe asthma is associated with reductions in exacerbation rates and improvements in lung function, asthma control and health-related quality of life, while reducing OCS dose. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03406078 ( ClinicalTrials.gov ). Registered 23 January 2018. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03406078.

NAVIGATOR: a phase 3 multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tezepelumab in adults and adolescents with severe, uncontrolled asthma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma have a significant unmet need for new treatments that have broader effects on airway inflammation, and that provide greater improvements in asthma outcomes than currently approved biologics and standard-of-care therapies. Tezepelumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks the activity of the epithelial cytokine thymic stromal lymphopoietin. In the PATHWAY phase 2b study (NCT02054130), tezepelumab significantly reduced exacerbations by up to 71% in adults with severe, uncontrolled asthma, irrespective of baseline disease phenotype. This article reports the design and objectives of the pivotal phase 3 NAVIGATOR study. METHODS: NAVIGATOR (NCT03347279) is an ongoing randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in adults (18-80 years old) and adolescents (12-17 years old) with severe, uncontrolled asthma, who are receiving treatment with medium- or high-dose inhaled corticosteroids plus at least one additional controller medication with or without oral corticosteroids (N = 1061). The study population includes approximately equal proportions of patients with high (≥ 300 cells/µL) and low (< 300 cells/µL) blood eosinophil counts. The study comprises a 5-6-week screening period, a 52-week treatment period and a 12-week post-treatment follow-up period. All patients will receive their prescribed controller medications without change throughout the study. The primary efficacy endpoint is the annualized asthma exacerbation rate during the 52-week treatment period. Key secondary endpoints include the effect of tezepelumab on lung function, asthma control and health-related quality of life. DISCUSSION: NAVIGATOR is evaluating the effect of tezepelumab in patients with a broad range of severe asthma phenotypes at baseline, including those with low blood eosinophil counts. The target sample size for NAVIGATOR (N = 1060) was achieved, and it is the largest clinical study of tezepelumab in severe, uncontrolled asthma to date. NAVIGATOR aims to further investigate the effect of tezepelumab on exacerbations and build on observations from the phase 2b PATHWAY study, and to demonstrate further the potential of tezepelumab to provide patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma with improvements in lung function, asthma control and health-related quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03347279 (ClinicalTrials.gov). Registered 20 November 2017.

Efficacy and safety of the biosimilar ABP 501 compared with adalimumab in patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised, double-blind, phase III equivalence study.

OBJECTIVES: ABP 501 is a Food and Drug Administration-approved biosimilar to adalimumab; structural, functional and pharmacokinetic evaluations have shown that the two are highly similar. We report results from a phase III study comparing efficacy, safety and immunogenicity between ABP 501 and adalimumab. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, active comparator-controlled, 26-week equivalence study, patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite methotrexate were randomised (1:1) to ABP 501 or adalimumab (40 mg) every 2 weeks. Primary endpoint was risk ratio (RR) of ACR20 between groups at week 24. Primary hypothesis that the treatments were equivalent would be confirmed if the 90% CI for RR of ACR20 at week 24 fell between 0.738 and 1.355, demonstrating that ABP 501 is similar to adalimumab. Secondary endpoints included Disease Activity Score 28-joint count-C reactive protein (DAS28-CRP). Safety was assessed via adverse events (AEs) and laboratory evaluations. Antidrug antibodies were assessed to determine immunogenicity. RESULTS: A total of 526 patients were randomised (n=264, ABP 501; n=262 adalimumab) and 494 completed the study. ACR20 response at week 24 was 74.6% (ABP 501) and 72.4% (adalimumab). At week 24, the RR of ACR20 (90% CI) between groups was 1.039 (0.954, 1.133), confirming the primary hypothesis. Changes from baseline in DAS28-CRP, ACR50 and ACR70 were similar. There were no clinically meaningful differences in AEs and laboratory abnormalities. A total of 38.3% (ABP 501) and 38.2% (adalimumab) of patients tested positive for binding antidrug antibodies. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study demonstrate that ABP 501 is similar to adalimumab in clinical efficacy, safety and immunogenicity in patients with moderate to severe RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01970475; Results.

Developing the Totality of Evidence for Biosimilars: Regulatory Considerations and Building Confidence for the Healthcare Community.

Biosimilars are highly similar versions of approved branded biologics. Unlike generics, they are not exact replicas of reference products. Minor differences between biosimilars and reference products in some aspects are expected; likewise, biosimilar products will differ from each other. The objective of this review is to discuss the challenges associated with the development and approval of biosimilar products that are unique because of their complex structure and specialized manufacturing processes, which can impact not only efficacy but also immunogenicity and safety. Regulatory guidelines recommend a totality-of-evidence approach focused on stepwise development that involves demonstration of structural similarity and functional equivalence. Structural and functional characteristics of the proposed biosimilar are compared with the reference product; similarity of these functions forms the foundation of the biosimilar development program, including potential animal studies, a human pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics equivalence study, and a clinical study to confirm similar efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity. The clinical study should be performed in a sensitive population using appropriate endpoints to allow detection of any clinically meaningful differences between the biosimilar and the reference product if such differences exist. In conclusion, development of biosimilars is focused on the minimization of potential differences between the proposed biosimilar and reference product and the establishment of a robust manufacturing process to consistently produce a high-quality biosimilar product.

Cost-effectiveness of sequenced treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with targeted immune modulators.

AIMS: To determine the cost-effectiveness of treatment sequences of biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs or Janus kinase/STAT pathway inhibitors (collectively referred to as bDMARDs) vs conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs) from the US societal perspective for treatment of patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with inadequate responses to cDMARDs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An individual patient simulation model was developed that assesses the impact of treatments on disease based on clinical trial data and real-world evidence. Treatment strategies included sequences starting with etanercept, adalimumab, certolizumab, or abatacept. Each of these treatment strategies was compared with cDMARDs. Incremental cost, incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for each treatment sequence relative to cDMARDs. The cost-effectiveness of each strategy was determined using a US willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY. RESULTS: For the base-case scenario, bDMARD treatment sequences were associated with greater treatment benefit (i.e. more QALYs), lower lost productivity costs, and greater treatment-related costs than cDMARDs. The expected ICERs for bDMARD sequences ranged from ∼$126,000 to $140,000 per QALY gained, which is below the US-specific WTP. Alternative scenarios examining the effects of homogeneous patients, dose increases, increased costs of hospitalization for severely physically impaired patients, and a lower baseline Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) Disability Index score resulted in similar ICERs. CONCLUSIONS: bDMARD treatment sequences are cost-effective from a US societal perspective.

Clinical similarity of biosimilar ABP 501 to adalimumab in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis: A randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase III study.

BACKGROUND: ABP 501 is a biosimilar of adalimumab. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of ABP 501 with adalimumab. METHODS: This 52-week, double-blind study randomized patients with moderate to severe psoriasis to ABP 501 or adalimumab. At week 16, those with 50% or more improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score from baseline on ABP 501 continued the same treatment, whereas adalimumab-treated patients were rerandomized to adalimumab or ABP 501. Clinical similarity in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index percent improvement from baseline to week 16 (primary end point) was established if the point estimate of treatment difference and its 2-sided 95% confidence interval between groups was within equivalence margin of ±15. Patients, including those undergoing a single transition at week 16, were evaluated for safety and immunogenicity. RESULTS: Psoriasis Area and Severity Index percent improvement at week 16 was 80.9 for ABP 501 and 83.1 for adalimumab (least-square mean difference -2.18 [95% confidence interval -7.39 to 3.02]). Adverse events (67.2% [117/174] vs 63.6% [110/173]) and antidrug antibody incidence (55.2% [96/174] vs 63.6% [110/173]) for ABP 501 vs adalimumab were similar. Safety, including immunogenicity, was similar among groups after single transition (week 20). LIMITATIONS: The 52-week data are not reported here. CONCLUSIONS: ABP 501 was shown to be clinically similar to adalimumab. Safety and immunogenicity were not impacted immediately after single transition (adalimumab to ABP 501).

A randomised, single-blind, single-dose, three-arm, parallel-group study in healthy subjects to demonstrate pharmacokinetic equivalence of ABP 501 and adalimumab.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate pharmacokinetic (PK) similarity of biosimilar candidate ABP 501 relative to adalimumab reference product from the USA and European Union (EU) and evaluate safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of ABP 501. METHODS: Randomised, single-blind, single-dose, three-arm, parallel-group study; healthy subjects were randomised to receive ABP 501 (n=67), adalimumab (USA) (n=69) or adalimumab (EU) (n=67) 40 mg subcutaneously. Primary end points were area under the serum concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUCinf) and the maximum observed concentration (Cmax). Secondary end points included safety and immunogenicity. RESULTS: AUCinf and Cmax were similar across the three groups. Geometrical mean ratio (GMR) of AUCinf was 1.11 between ABP 501 and adalimumab (USA), and 1.04 between ABP 501 and adalimumab (EU). GMR of Cmax was 1.04 between ABP 501 and adalimumab (USA) and 0.96 between ABP 501 and adalimumab (EU). The 90% CIs for the GMRs of AUCinf and Cmax were within the prespecified standard PK equivalence criteria of 0.80 to 1.25. Treatment-related adverse events were mild to moderate and were reported for 35.8%, 24.6% and 41.8% of subjects in the ABP 501, adalimumab (USA) and adalimumab (EU) groups; incidence of antidrug antibodies (ADAbs) was similar among the study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study demonstrated PK similarity of ABP 501 with adalimumab (USA) and adalimumab (EU) after a single 40-mg subcutaneous injection. No new safety signals with ABP 501 were identified. The safety and tolerability of ABP 501 was similar to the reference products, and similar ADAb rates were observed across the three groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: EudraCT number 2012-000785-37; Results.

Influence of patient perceptions and preferences for osteoporosis medication on adherence behavior in the Denosumab Adherence Preference Satisfaction study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate patient perceptions of subcutaneous denosumab or oral alendronate in postmenopausal women with or at risk for osteoporosis and how these perceptions influence adherence. METHODS: Postmenopausal women with low bone mass were randomized to denosumab 60 mg every 6 months for 1 year (treatment period 1 [TP1]) followed by alendronate 70 mg once weekly for 1 year (treatment period 2 [TP2]), or vice versa. Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire data were collected at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months; a necessity-concerns differential (NCD) was calculated for each time point. Logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the influences of baseline characteristics on nonadherence. RESULTS: Participants included 250 women (alendronate/denosumab, n = 124; denosumab/alendronate, n = 126). During TP1, the NCD at month 6 was higher with denosumab than with alendronate (P = 0.0076). In TP2, the NCD was higher for women switched to denosumab than for women switched to alendronate at 6 months (P = 0.0126) and 12 months (P = 0.4605). Denosumab was preferred to alendronate regardless of treatment sequence (P < 0.0001). Covariate analysis revealed that higher TP2 baseline necessity scores were associated with lower odds of nonadherence (P = 0.0055), whereas higher concerns about medication scores were associated with higher odds of nonadherence (P = 0.0247). Higher NCD scores were also associated with lower odds of nonadherence (P = 0.0015). CONCLUSIONS: Participants preferred denosumab to alendronate while on treatment and had more positive perceptions of denosumab than alendronate. These perceptions were associated with better adherence.

Use of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) antagonists infliximab, etanercept, and adalimumab in patients with concurrent rheumatoid arthritis and hepatitis B or hepatitis C: a retrospective record review of 11 patients.

An understanding of the cytokine cascade in a rheumatoid joint has led to the development of new therapeutic options, including drugs targeting tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha). The safety profile of these agents in patients with hepatitis-induced liver disease, however, remains a concern because of risks associated with immune suppression. To examine the effect of three different TNF-alpha antagonists, infliximab, etanercept, and adalimumab, on serum transaminases and hepatitis viral load in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and concurrent hepatitis B (HBV) or hepatitis C (HCV). Medical records of 11 patients with diagnosis of RA and documented seropositivity for hepatitis B or hepatitis C were retrospectively reviewed for worsening of hepatic inflammation and viral proliferation as measured by a rise in aspartate aminotransferase (AST) or alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and viral load while using these agents. Three patients had RA with concurrent chronic HBV and eight patients had RA with concurrent chronic HCV. Seven patients remained on a single anti-TNF-alpha agent and four patients switched to a second anti-TNF-alpha agent due to treatment failure. Two patients showed a transient elevation in AST and/or ALT from normal, but in all 11 patients, AST and ALT levels were within one time the upper range of normal at the conclusion of the study. No significant increase in viral load was seen except one patient who showed a fourfold increase from baseline. Our case series supports results obtained from previous studies examining the safety of anti-TNF-alpha agents in patients with underlying hepatic disease. Use of these agents in patients with HBV or HCV may be associated with a transient transaminitis but appears to be safe overall. In both groups, frequent monitoring of serum transaminase levels and viral load is essential.

Infiltration of histiocytes and multinucleated giant cells in the myocardium of a patient with multicentric reticulohistiocytosis.

Multicentric reticulohistiocytosis (MRH) is a rare multisystem disease characterized by skin nodules and a destructive polyarthritis. We describe cardiac disease in a 42-year-old African American female with a history of MRH for 29 years and dilated cardiomyopathy for 5 years. During a congestive heart failure flare, the patient was slow to respond to standard treatment. A left/right heart catheterization and endomyocardial biopsy were performed, and the patient was found to have evidence of myocardial MRH infiltration.

Effects of methotrexate use in a patient with rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and multiple sclerosis (MS) share similar pathophysiologic processes but coexistence of both diseases in the same patient has rarely been described. We describe the case of a 32 year old woman with rheumatoid arthritis treated with 12.5 mg of methotrexate once a week and 1 mg folic acid who developed paresthesias of her upper and lower extremities. Three years later, she acutely developed 6th nerve palsy, gait imbalance and urinary urgency and a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis was made. The use of methotrexate, though effective in controlling her rheumatoid arthritis, did not influence the development or progression of her multiple sclerosis. Although RA and MS may coexist in the same patient, treatment of one disease may have no influence on the clinical course of the other. Thus, the mechanism by which methotrexate suppresses disease activity in RA but not in MS despite both being T-cell mediated autoimmune diseases requires further investigative studies.

Histological evaluation of liver in two rheumatoid arthritis patients with chronic hepatitis B and C treated with TNF-alpha blockade: case reports.

Tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha antagonists successfully modulate the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, little is known about the effect of TNF-alpha blockade on the histology of chronic viral hepatitis. We describe the cases of two patients with RA, one with concurrent chronic hepatitis B virus and the other with hepatitis C virus infection who, as part of their evaluation, underwent liver biopsies while undergoing treatment with a TNF-alpha antagonist.

Successful etanercept use in an HIV-positive patient with rheumatoid arthritis.

Limited information exists on treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in a patient with coexisting human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. We report a case of a patient with rheumatoid arthritis who then became HIV positive. His HIV viral load was controlled with antiretroviral therapy, but he continued to have active rheumatoid arthritis despite therapy with hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, and corticosteroids. Because of unremitting rheumatoid disease, we are now treating him with a TNFalpha inhibitor, and his rheumatoid disease activity has decreased from 28 swollen and tender joint count to less than 5.

Rosai-Dorfman disease in a patient with systemic lupus erythematosus.

Rosai-Dorfman disease (RDD), also known as sinus histocytosis with massive lymphadenopathy, is a clinically benign, frequently chronic, painless lymphadenopathy. It can also involve extranodal sites. We describe a 37-year-old man with a recent diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus and antiphospholipid antibody syndrome who had lacrimal gland and orbital involvement and nodal and extranodal sites with RDD.

Septic arthritis caused by Actinobacillus ureae in a patient with rheumatoid arthritis receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha therapy.

Actinobacillus ureae, formerly known as Pasteurella ureae, is a rare human pathogen. We describe a case of septic arthritis and abscess formation caused by this unusual organism in a patient with rheumatoid arthritis, who was being treated with tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors.