Certolizumab Pegol Treatment in Patients with Axial-Spondyloarthritis-Associated Acute Anterior Uveitis: a Narrative Review.

BACKGROUND: Acute anterior uveitis (AAU) affects up to 40% of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). An effective treatment for patients with axSpA that reduces the risk of AAU flares while also targeting axial symptoms is therefore highly desirable. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) have been shown effective for treatment of axSpA and AAU occurrence, with guidelines conditionally recommending treating patients with axSpA and associated AAU with TNFi monoclonal antibodies. To date, most available data on the impact of TNFis on AAU in axSpA are from observational, open-label studies without parallel comparator arms. However, there is a growing body of evidence describing the impact of the TNFi certolizumab pegol (CZP) on the incidence of axSpA-associated AAU. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to collate data pertaining to the impact of CZP in axSpA-associated AAU in patients across the full axSpA spectrum. METHODS: Data were obtained from four industry-supported phase 3 and 4 clinical trials (C-VIEW, C-axSpAnd, C-OPTIMISE, and RAPID-axSpA). To supplement these data, a targeted literature review was performed through searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and reference lists. RESULTS: Available data from 1467 patients from the C-VIEW, C-axSpAnd, C-OPTIMISE, and RAPID-axSpA trials show CZP to be effective in AAU in patients across the full axSpA spectrum, reducing AAU flares when compared with placebo or pretreatment period. No differences in AAU outcomes were reported when stratified by axSpA subgroup age or sex. The targeted literature review identified six further studies of CZP in spondyloarthritis-associated AAU, only one of which was specific to axSpA. CONCLUSION: CZP was effective in reducing AAU incidence in clinical trials with patients with axSpA. The targeted literature review, however, highlighted that there remains a paucity of data beyond these trials. Data from comparative studies would further enhance the body of evidence on the effects of CZP in patients with axSpA who develop AAU.

Real-World Six- and Twelve-Month Drug Retention, Remission, and Response Rates of Secukinumab in 2,017 Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis in Thirteen European Countries.

OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of real-life studies on interleukin-17 (IL-17) inhibition in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We assessed real-life 6- and 12-month effectiveness (i.e., retention, remission, low disease activity [LDA], and response rates) of the IL-17 inhibitor secukinumab in PsA patients overall and across 1) number of prior biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs), 2) years since diagnosis, and 3) European registries. METHODS: Thirteen quality registries in rheumatology participating in the European Spondyloarthritis Research Collaboration Network provided longitudinal, observational data collected as part of routine care for secondary use. Data were pooled and analyzed with Kaplan-Meier plots, log rank tests, Cox regression, and multiple linear and logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 2,017 PsA patients started treatment with secukinumab between 2015 and 2018. Overall secukinumab retention rates were 86% and 76% after 6 and 12 months, respectively. Crude (LUNDEX adjusted) 6-month remission/LDA (LDA including remission) rates for the 28-joint Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis, the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the C-reactive protein level, and the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) were 13%/46% (11%/39%), 36%/55% (30%/46%), and 13%/56% (11%/47%), and 12-month rates were 11%/46% (7%/31%), 39%/56% (26%/38%), and 16%/62% (10%/41%), respectively. Clinical Disease Activity Index remission/LDA rates were similar to the SDAI rates. Six-month American College of Rheumatology 20%/50%/70% improvement criteria responses were 34%/19%/11% (29%/16%/9%); 12-month rates were 37%/21%/11% (24%/14%/7%). Secukinumab effectiveness was significantly better for b/tsDMARD-naive patients, similar across time since diagnosis (<2/2-4/>4 years), and varied significantly across the European registries. CONCLUSION: In this large real-world study on secukinumab treatment in PsA, 6- and 12-month effectiveness was comparable to that in previous observational studies of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors. Retention, remission, LDA, and response rates were significantly better for b/tsDMARD-naive patients, were independent of time since diagnosis, and varied significantly across the European countries.

Golimumab effectiveness in biologic inadequate responding patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and spondyloarthritis in real-life from the Italian registry GISEA.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of golimumab in biologic inadequate responder (IR) patients with Rheumatoid arthritis (RA), Spondyloarthritis (SpA), and Psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: We analyzed 1424 patients on golimumab from the GISEA registry. Drug survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis in biologic-naïve, 1-biologic IR, ≥2-biologics IR patients. Hazard ratios (HRs) of discontinuing golimumab at 2 years were assessed by multivariate Cox regression. Patients achieving CDAI based low disease activity (LDA) or BASDAI<4 were calculated at 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: In RA (n.370), the 2-years survival on golimumab was 61.4% in 1-biologic IR, 51.9% in≥2-biologics IR, and 73.1% in biologic-naive patients (P=0.002 vs≥2-biologics IR). In SpA (n.502), the survival was similar among 1-biologic IR (80%), ≥2-biologics IR (76.5%), and biologic-naive (74.6%) patients (P>0.05). In PsA (n.552) the survival was 72% in 1-biologic IR, 72.5% in≥2-biologics IR, and 71.8% in naïve-biologic (P>0.05). Predictors of golimumab discontinuation were monotherapy (HR 1.65) for RA, female gender for SpA (HR 2.48) and PsA (HR 1.57). In RA, patients on CDAI-LDA were lower in 1-biologic IR (40%) or≥2 biologics IR (40%) than in biologic-naïve (60%) group at 6 months (P=0.02), but no difference was observed at 12 months. In PsA and SpA, the percentage of patients on CDAI-LDA or BASDAI<4 at 6 months was almost identical across the subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Golimumab had similar effectiveness in biologic-failure and biologic-naïve SpA and PsA, but seems to be less effective in multi-failure RA patients, especially as monotherapy. The best outcomes were seen in male patients.

Understanding the Role of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) in the Joint and Beyond: A Comprehensive Review of IL-6 Inhibition for the Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, debilitating autoimmune disorder involving inflammation and progressive destruction of the joints, affecting up to 1% of the population. The majority of patients with RA have one or more comorbid conditions, the most common being cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, and depression, the presence of which are associated with poorer clinical outcomes and lower health-related quality of life. RA pathogenesis is driven by a complex network of proinflammatory cells and cytokines, and of these, interleukin-6 (IL-6) plays a key role in the chronic inflammation associated with RA. Through cell signaling that can be initiated by both membrane-bound and soluble forms of its receptor, IL-6 acts both locally to promote joint inflammation and destruction, and in the circulation to mediate extra-articular manifestations of RA, including pain, fatigue, morning stiffness, anemia, and weight loss. This narrative review describes the role of IL-6 in the pathogenesis of RA, its comorbidities, and extra-articular systemic manifestations, and examines the effects of the IL-6 receptor inhibitors sarilumab and tocilizumab on clinical endpoints of RA, patient-reported outcomes, and common comorbidities and extra-articular manifestations.

Biologic therapy and spinal radiographic progression in patients with axial spondyloarthritis: A structured literature review.

We aimed to perform a structured literature review of spinal radiographic progression, as assessed by the modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score (mSASSS), in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) or nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) treated with biologic therapy. Searches were limited to English language manuscripts published in the 11 years prior to 9 July 2019. Randomized controlled trials, open-label extensions (OLEs) and observational studies reporting mSASSS progression in patients with AS or nr-axSpA treated with biologics were eligible for inclusion. Bias was assessed using the methodological index for nonrandomized studies (MINORS) tool. Among the 322 studies identified in the literature search, 23 (11 OLEs and 12 cohort studies) met the eligibility criteria and were selected for inclusion. Most studies reported mSASSS progression in patients with AS receiving tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) treatment. One study reported mSASSS progression in patients with AS treated with secukinumab, an interleukin-17A inhibitor. The mean (range) MINORS score was 11.3 (7-15) for the 15 noncomparative studies and 15 (12-22) for the 8 comparative studies. Although results of the individual studies were variable, mSASSS progression in patients with AS was generally minimal and slow with long-term TNFi therapy. Moreover, odds ratios for the likelihood of mSASSS progression with/without TNFi favoured TNFi therapy in several of the cohort studies. The rate of mSASSS progression following continuous secukinumab treatment was low and remained stable over 4 years. Of two studies reporting progression in patients with nr-axSpA treated with TNFis, one showed no mSASSS progression; however, the lack of control limited comparative conclusions.

Efficacy and retention rate of adalimumab in rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis patients after first-line etanercept failure: the FEARLESS cohort.

Few studies have compared the efficacy of switching from etanercept to adalimumab in the real-life setting in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This study evaluated the 2-year retention rate and 12-month efficacy of adalimumab in RA and PsA patients, previously treated with etanercept. RA and PsA patients from 11 Italian Rheumatology Units received adalimumab after first-line etanercept failure. Two-year adalimumab retention rate was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard models were developed to examine predictors of drug persistence. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were developed to examine potential predictors of 12-month DAS-28 remission. The study population included 117 RA (disease duration of 10.1 ± 7.7 years and baseline DAS28-ESR of 4.97 ± 1.3) and 102 PsA (disease duration of 7.1 ± 5.1 years and baseline DAPSA of 24.6 ± 11.8). The 2-year retention rate was 48.2% in RA and 56.5% in PsA patients. Concomitant methotrexate treatment was not associated with increased drug survival in both groups. Similarly, cause of etanercept discontinuation or treatment duration was not associated with retention rate. 12-month remission and low disease activity were achieved, respectively, in 27.3% and 23.9% of RA patients and 27.4% and 23.5% PsA of patients. In multivariate models, etanercept discontinuation due to inefficacy (OR 0.27, 95% CI 1.03-0.73; p = 0.009) and baseline DAS-28 (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29-0.69; p < 0.001) remained significant negative predictors of remission in RA patients. No variable was associated with remission in PsA patients. Adalimumab after etanercept failure was highly effective and safe in both RA and PsA patients.

Two-year persistence of golimumab as second-line biologic agent in rheumatoid arthritis as compared to other subcutaneous tumor necrosis factor inhibitors: real-life data from the LORHEN registry.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the 2-year retention rate of golimumab compared with etanercept and adalimumab as second-line biologic agent in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who failed a previous tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi). METHODS: Data on RA patients treated with a second-line subcutaneous TNFi were extracted from a multicentric Italian cohort (the LORHEN registry). The analysis was limited to etanercept, adalimumab and golimumab in the period when all were available in Italy (since October 2010). The 2-year retention rate was calculated by Kaplan-Meier method and the comparative risk for discontinuation among individual TNFi was compared by a stratified log-rank test. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-five RA patients treated with etanercept (n = 76), adalimumab (n = 68) or golimumab (n = 51) were included in the analysis. The 2-year retention rate (40% with a median time-on-drug of 12.9 months in the whole population) was significantly lower for adalimumab (31.2%, P = 0.018) and numerically lower for etanercept (39.8%, P = 0.068) compared with golimumab (53.4%) because of a higher discontinuation rate due to adverse events (P = 0.042 and P = 0.038 versus golimumab, respectively). Drug survival was greater in concomitant synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (sDMARD) users (44.2%) compared with TNFi monotherapy (22.5%, P = 0.036). No difference was found in survival analysis according to first-line TNFi reason for discontinuation and pattern of TNFi switch (antibody-receptor, antibody-antibody or receptor-antibody). CONCLUSIONS: Our real-life data confirmed switching to a second TNFi as a good option for treating first-line TNFi failures in RA, especially in combination with sDMARDs. Second-line golimumab showed an overall better 2-year drug survival compared with adalimumab and etanercept.

Two-year retention rate of golimumab in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis: data from the LORHEN registry.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to provide data on golimumab real-life use in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) from a multicentre observational registry of Northern Italy. METHODS: We extracted data of patients who started treatment with golimumab from October 2010, and who had at least one follow-up visit. Data were analysed until a maximum follow-up of 24 months. The two-year retention rate in the three diseases was assessed with Kaplan-Meier estimators. To compare crude survival between diagnoses and lines of treatment we used the log-rank test, while Cox proportional hazard models were used to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: Overall, 410 subjects were included: 180 patients with RA, 110 with PsA and 120 with AS. The two-year retention rate of patients with RA was 47.3%, 48% for PsA, and 62.8% for AS. Crude survival on treatment of patients with AS was significantly higher than that of RA patients (p=0.032), while no significant difference was found between AS and PsA and between RA and PsA. In patients with RA, subjects treated with concomitant sDMARDs showed a lower discontinuation rate than those receiving golimumab alone. The comparison between first and second line of treatment groups did not show any significant difference in mean survival time in patients with RA, PsA and AS. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report of real-life data on two-year survival on treatment with golimumab in RA, PsA and AS. Golimumab showed a similar retention rate when given as first or second line of treatment.

Biomarkers in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic literature review.

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is characterized by chronic inflammation of peripheral joints and axial skeleton, associated with a strong genetic background. Clinics include enthesitis or dactylitis and extra-articular involvement as uveitis or inflammatory bowel disease, while treatment options range from nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) to biologics, targeting TNF α or Th17. No serum autoantibody is associated with PsA, while other biomarkers have been proposed for early diagnosis or to predict treatment response. To better discuss this area of growing interest we performed a systematic review of the literature on biomarkers in PsA. Our research retrieved 408 papers, and 38 were included in the analysis. Based on the available literature, we draw some recommendations for the use of biomarkers in the management of patients with PsA.

Recommendations for the use of biologic therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: update from the Italian Society for Rheumatology II. Safety.

Given the availability of novel biologic agents for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), various national scientific societies have developed specific recommendations in order to assist rheumatologists in prescribing these drugs. The Italian Society for Rheumatology (Società Italiana di Reumatologia, SIR) decided to update its recommendations, and, to this end, a systematic literature review was performed and the evidence derived from it was discussed and summarized as expert opinions. Levels of evidence and strength of recommendations were reported. The recommendations reported refer to the safety of biologic agents and are intended to help prescribing rheumatologists to optimise the use of biologic agents in patients with RA seen in everyday practice; they are not to be considered as a regulatory rule.

Patient preferences in the choice of anti-TNF therapies in rheumatoid arthritis. Results from a questionnaire survey (RIVIERA study).

OBJECTIVE: To identify the determinants of anti-TNF-naive patients' preferences for the route of administration of anti-TNF agents. METHODS: The study was carried out in 50 Italian rheumatology centres (802 patients). All patients completed a 31-item questionnaire addressing their perceptions of current treatment and the preferences for treatment with anti-TNF agents. Statistical methods included analysis of variance (ANOVA), t-test and chi-square test. RESULTS: The response rate to the questionnaire was 97.6%. At the time of the survey, 310 (39.9%) patients were dissatisfied with current treatments, owing to inefficacy, side effects and inconvenience of administration. The i.v. and s.c. routes of administration were preferred by 50.2 and 49.8%, respectively. No significant difference was found in patients by gender, age, RA duration or number of drugs used. Reasons for the choice of i.v. administration were the safety of treatment at the hospital and the reassuring effect of physician presence. The s.c. administration was chosen for the convenience of treatment and in particular for home treatment. Patients dissatisfied with current therapy due to side effects preferred s.c. administration (P = 0.029), whereas patients choosing the i.v. route had slightly higher scores on 'today pain' (P = 0.047) and 'articular pain' (P = 0.023) of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Index (RADAI). CONCLUSIONS: Both i.v. and s.c. treatments were well accepted by patients. However, treatment choice has to be discussed with patients, as individual preference seems to be determined by personal attitudes towards safety and convenience, by past experience and by the perception of current disease status.