Drug Retention Rate and Causes of Discontinuation of Adalimumab in Uveitis: Real-World Data from the Biotherapies in Uveitis (BioÚvea) Study Group.

PURPOSE: To study the drug retention rate (DRR), causes, and predictors of discontinuation of adalimumab (ADA) in a real-world uveitis setting. DESIGN: Multicentric, nationwide, registry-based, ambispective, observational study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients treated with ADA for noninfectious uveitis (NIU) in the Biotherapies for Uveitis (BioÚvea) Spanish registry from November 2016 to November 2017. METHODS: Demographics, clinical data, timing, and reasons for discontinuation, if occurred, were recorded. The DRR and drug retention time (DRT) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Median follow-up was analyzed by reverse Kaplan-Meier. Log-rank test was used for comparisons. Cox proportional-hazards model (PHM) and propensity score matching were used to identify predictors for discontinuation due to inefficacy and adverse events. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Drug retention rate and DRT. RESULTS: A total of 392 patients were analyzed, including 218 women. Median age was 39 (interquartile range, 25) years. Nonanterior uveitis was recorded in 242 patients. Median follow-up was 49.07 (0.97-131.67) months, median DRT (survival) was 69.3 months, and 14 patients were lost to follow-up. The DRR at 6, 12, 24, and 60 months was 92.97%, 87.68%, 76.31%, and 54.28%, respectively. Adalimumab was discontinued in 151 patients. Discontinuation was due to lack or loss of efficacy in 74 patients, adverse event in 34 patients, and sustained quiescence in 25 patients. Recorded adverse events included infections in 10 patients and malignant neoplasms in 3 patients. Concurrent classic immunomodulatory therapy (IMT) was given to 251 patients. We did not find DRT differences regarding the use of concurrent IMT. Adalimumab was prescribed as a second or greater biotherapy line in 76 patients who showed shorter DRT (P = 0.038). Starting ADA in nonbiotherapy-naive patients was a predictor for "discontinuation due to inefficacy," whereas undifferentiated uveitis was a predictor for "discontinuation due to adverse event." Drug retention time was significantly shorter when spared or intensified, mainly due to discontinuation after sustained quiescence. CONCLUSIONS: Drug retention rate of ADA in uveitis at 60 months was 54.28%, with a good safety profile. The use of concurrent IMT did not show a significant influence on DRT. The use of ADA as a second or further biotherapy could be predictive for discontinuation due to inefficacy. Undifferentiated uveitis may be prone to premature discontinuation of ADA due to adverse events.

Central retinal artery occlusion in Wegener's granulomatosis: a diagnostic dilemma.

PURPOSE: To report a case of central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO) in a patient with biopsy-verified Wegener's granulomatosis (WG) with positive C-ANCA. METHODS: A 55-year-old woman presented with a 3-day history of acute painless bilateral loss of vision; she also complained of fever and weight loss. Examination showed a CRAO in the left eye and angiographically documented choroidal ischemia in both eyes. RESULTS: The possibility of systemic vasculitis was not kept in mind until further studies were carried out; methylprednisolone pulse therapy was then started. Renal biopsy disclosed focal and segmental necrotizing vasculitis of the medium-sized arteries, supporting the diagnosis of WG, and cyclophosphamide pulse therapy was administered with gradual improvement, but there was no visual recovery. CONCLUSION: CRAO as presenting manifestation of WG, in the context of retinal vasculitis, is very uncommon, but we should be aware of WG in the etiology of CRAO. This report shows the difficulty of diagnosing Wegener's granulomatosis; it requires a high index of suspicion, and we should obtain an accurate medical history and repeat serological and histopathological examinations. It emphasizes that inflammation of arteries leads to irreversible retinal infarction, and visual loss may occur.