Factors Associated With Adverse Outcomes in Uveitis Related to Spondyloarthritis: Development of an Outcome Score (SpA-U).

BACKGROUND: Evaluating the efficacy and refractoriness to treatment and determining factors associated with adverse outcomes in uveitis associated with spondylarthritis (SpA) are complicated by the lack of validated outcome measures. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to develop an outcome score SpA-U in patients with uveitis associated with SpA and to determine factors associated with adverse outcomes in patients with uveitis under systemic treatment. METHODS: The outcome score SpA-U was defined by best-corrected visual acuity, anterior chamber inflammation, macular edema and inflammation of posterior chamber, global assessment, and refractoriness to treatment. Factors associated with adverse outcomes in uveitis were studied using linear regression. For categorical factors, marginal averages and their SEs are displayed together with linear regression coefficients with 95% confidence intervals. For continuous factors, averages and SDs are reported in addition to linear regression coefficients with 95% confidence interval. Two regression coefficients are reported for each variable: unadjusted and adjusted for age at diagnosis and sex. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-seven uveitis outbreaks were included. Sixty-two uveitis outbreaks (31%) were classified as severe, 42 as moderate (21%), and 93 as mild (47%) based on the definition and construction of outcome score. The results of the linear regression model revealed that the uveitis activity was more severe in patients with smoking history ( ß = 0.34), axial and peripheral involvement ( ß = 0.43), Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score >2.1 ( ß = 0.45), positive HLA-B27 ( ß = 0.29), female sex ( ß = 0.19), patients with C-reactive protein elevation ( ß = 0.002), and bilateral ocular involvement ( ß = 0.32). At the same time, shorter disease evolution ( ß = -0.02) was associated with less severe uveitis activity. CONCLUSION: We have determined factors associated with adverse outcomes in patients with uveitis associated with SpA by developing an outcome score SpA-U that integrates ocular inflammatory activity, visual acuity, global assessment, and refractoriness to treatment.

Validation of UVEDAI: An Index for Evaluating the Level of Inflammatory Activity in Uveitis.

INTRODUCTION: Uveitis is the inflammation of the middle layer of the eye, the uvea, and is a major cause of blindness. None of the instruments used in clinical practice are, in themselves, sufficient to evaluate the course of uveitis. Therefore, it is necessary to develop instruments enabling standardized measurement of inflammatory activity. We developed a composite disease activity index for patients with uveitis known as UVEDAI, which considers the overall activity of the eye. The objective of this study was to validate the composite index of ocular inflammation, UVEDAI. METHODS: A multicenter cross-sectional study involving eight Spanish tertiary hospitals. Sixty-two patients aged ≥ 18 years with acute uveitis were recruited. Participants gave informed consent before participating in the study. A full ophthalmological examination was performed by two ophthalmologists to determine inflammatory activity: one used the UVEDAI score and the other used clinical judgment. The ophthalmologists did not share their findings with each other to avoid introducing bias into the analysis. Construct validity was established by means of factor analysis. The criterion validity of the index was determined using an ordinal multivariate regression model, in which the dependent variable was the degree of uveal inflammation (mild, moderate, or high/severe). Cut-off points were determined for the UVEDAI and for the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were included. Total variance with the three components accounted for 80.32% of the construct validity. Each of the three components identified one type of eye involvement. The discriminatory capacity of UVEDAI was 0.867 (95% CI 0.778; 0.955 p < 0.001) for mild versus moderate-high and 0.946 (95% CI 0.879; 1.000 p < 0.001) for high versus mild-moderate. CONCLUSIONS: The variables included in UVEDAI enable ocular inflammatory activity to be described with a high degree of accuracy. The index may be used to evaluate and classify this activity with considerable discriminatory power.

Anti-TNF vs tocilizumab in refractory uveitic cystoid macular edema due to Behcet's disease. Multicenter study of 49 patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of TNF inhibitors (adalimumab (ADA) and infliximab (IFX)) vs tocilizumab (TCZ) in patients with refractory cystoid macular edema (CME) due to Behçet's disease (BD). METHODS: Multicenter study of patients with BD-associated CME refractory to conventional and/or biological immunosuppressive drugs. From a cohort of 177 patients treated with anti-TNF and 14 patients treated with TCZ, we selected those with CME at baseline. We analyzed the evolution of macular thickness (main outcome), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and intraocular inflammation (Tyndall and vitritis) from baseline up to 4 years in the 3 groups mentioned. RESULTS: 49 patients and 72 eyes with CME were included. ADA was used in 25 patients (40 eyes), IFX in 15 (21 eyes) and TCZ in 9 (11 eyes). No statistically significant baseline differences were observed between the 3 groups except for a lower basal BCVA in TCZ group and a higher basal degree of intraocular inflammation in ADA group. Most patients from all groups had received several conventional immunosuppressive drugs. In addition, most patients in the group of TCZ had also received anti-TNF agents. Biological therapy was used in monotherapy (n=8) or combined with conventional immunosuppressive drugs (n=41). Macular thickness progressively decreased in the 3 groups, with no signs of CME after 1 year of treatment. Similarly, BCVA improvement and inflammatory intraocular remission was achieved in all groups. CONCLUSION: Refractory CME associated with BD uveitis can be effectively treated either with ADA, IFX or TCZ. Furthermore, TCZ is effective in patients resistant to anti-TNF therapy.

Anti-retinal Antibodies in Sarcoidosis.

PURPOSE: To measure, characterize, and evaluate the clinical significance of anti-retinal antibodies in patients with sarcoid uveitis. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Prospective study of anti-retinal antibodies in 45 patients with biopsy-proven sarcoidosis (25 with and 20 without uveitis). Results were compared with patients with confirmed infectious uveitis (n = 40) and non-infectious uveitis (n = 40). RESULTS: Among sarcoidosis patients, anti-retinal antibodies were positive in 23/25 patients with uveitis and in 15/20 without uveitis [P = ns]. The most common antigens recognized were carbonic anhydrase II (14/23) and α-enolase (6/23). Anti-carbonic anhydrase II autoantibodies were infrequently detected in sarcoidosis patients without uveitis (2 out 15, P < .001), in patients with infectious uveitis (1 out 18, P < .001), and in patients with non-infectious uveitis (8 out 37, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Anti-retinal antibodies recognizing carbonic anhydrase II are common in sarcoid uveitis. Although not fully sensitive and specific, they might be a useful non-invasive diagnostic tool for the diagnosis of sarcoid uveitis.

Efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of methotrexate, adalimumab or their combination in non-infectious non-anterior uveitis: a protocol for a multicentre, randomised, parallel three arms, active-controlled, phase III open label with blinded outcome assessment study.

INTRODUCTION: Non-infectious uveitis include a heterogeneous group of sight-threatening and incapacitating conditions. Their correct management sometimes requires the use of immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs), prescribed in monotherapy or in combination. Several observational studies showed that the use of ISDs in combination could be more effective than and as safe as their use in monotherapy. However, a direct comparison between these two treatment strategies has not been carried out yet. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Combination THerapy with mEthotrexate and adalImumAb for uveitis (CoTHEIA) study is a phase III, multicentre, prospective, randomised, single-blinded with masked outcome assessment, parallel three arms with 1:1:1 allocation, active-controlled, superiority study design, comparing the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of methotrexate, adalimumab or their combination in non-infectious non-anterior uveitis. We aim to recruit 192 subjects. The duration of the treatment and follow-up will last up to 52 weeks, plus 70 days follow-up with no treatment. The complete and maintained resolution of the ocular inflammation will be assessed by masked evaluators (primary outcome). In addition to other secondary measurements of efficacy (quality of life, visual acuity and costs) and safety, we will identify subjects' subgroups with different treatment responses by developing prediction models based on machine learning techniques using genetic and proteomic biomarkers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol, annexes and informed consent forms were approved by the Reference Clinical Research Ethic Committee at the Hospital Clínico San Carlos (Madrid, Spain) and the Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Products. We will elaborate a dissemination plan including production of materials adapted to several formats to communicate the clinical trial progress and findings to a broad group of stakeholders. The promoter will be the only access to the participant-level data, although it can be shared within the legal situation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 2020-000130-18; NCT04798755.

Long-term follow-up of certolizumab pegol in uveitis due to immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: multicentre study of 80 patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate effectiveness and safety of certolizumab pegol (CZP) in uveitis due to immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID). METHODS: Multicentre study of CZP-treated patients with IMID uveitis refractory to conventional immunosuppressant. Effectiveness was assessed through the following ocular parameters: best-corrected visual acuity, anterior chamber cells, vitritis, macular thickness and retinal vasculitis. These variables were compared between the baseline, and first week, first, third, sixth months, first and second year. RESULTS: We studied 80 (33 men/47 women) patients (111 affected eyes) with a mean age of 41.6±11.7 years. The IMID included were: spondyloarthritis (n=43), Behçet's disease (n=10), psoriatic arthritis (n=8), Crohn's disease (n=4), sarcoidosis (n=2), juvenile idiopathic arthritis (n=1), reactive arthritis (n=1), rheumatoid arthritis (n=1), relapsing polychondritis (n=1), CONCLUSIONS: CZP seems to be effective and safe in uveitis related to different IMID, even in patients refractory to previous biological drugs.

Intravenous methylprednisolone induces rapid improvement in non-infectious uveitis: a multicentre study of 112 patients.

OBJECTIVES: Rapid control of intraocular inflammation in non-infectious uveitis (NIU) is mandatory to avoid irreversible structural and functional damage. In this study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of intravenous methylprednisolone (IVMP) pulses in the treatment of NIU. METHODS: A retrospective case series of 112 patients who received IVMP for the treatment of NIU, either isolated or associated with different underlying diseases, was studied. Intraocular inflammation (anterior chamber cells and vitritis) was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures were macular thickness and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA). Patients were assessed at baseline visit, and at days 2-5, 7, 15 and 30 after initiation of IVMP pulse therapy. RESULTS: A total of 112 patients (mean age 42±14.5 yrs) were assessed. An underlying immune-mediated disease was diagnosed in 73 patients. Inflammatory ocular patterns were panuveitis (n=68), posterior uveitis (n=30), anterior uveitis (AU) (n=12), and intermediate uveitis (n=2). Additionally, patients presented cystoid macular oedema (CME) (n=50), retinal vasculitis (n=37), and exudative retinal detachment (n=31). Therapies used before IVMP included intraocular glucocorticoids (n=4), high-dose oral systemic glucocorticoids (n=77), and conventional (n=107) or biologic (n=40) immunosuppressive drugs. IVMP dose ranged from 80 to 1,000 mg/day for 3-5 consecutive days. Improvement was observed in AU, vitritis, BCVA, CME, and retinal vasculitis. At first month evaluation, total remission was achieved in 19 patients. Side effects of IVMP were respiratory infections (n=3), uncontrolled hyperglycaemia (n=1), herpes zoster (n=1), and oral candidiasis (n=1). CONCLUSIONS: IVMP pulse therapy was effective and safe, and achieved rapid control of NIU.

Tocilizumab in Behçet's disease with refractory ocular and/or neurological involvement: response according to different clinical phenotypes.

OBJECTIVES: Anti-IL6R tocilizumab (TCZ) therapy has proved to be useful in the treatment of refractory ocular and/or neurological involvement of Behçet's disease (BD). However, TCZ efficacy in other BD manifestations remains unclear. In this study we aimed to assess the efficacy of TCZ in the different clinical phenotypes of BD. METHODS: This is a multicentre study of BD patients treated with TCZ, due to refractivity to standard systemic treatment. RESULTS: We studied 16 patients (10 men/6 women); mean age 36.5±18.2 years. The main clinical manifestations at TCZ onset were ocular, oral and/or genital ulcers, arthritis, folliculitis and/or neurological involvement. Before TCZ, they had received several conventional and/or biological immunosuppressants, such as methotrexate, cyclosporine, adalimumab or infliximab. TCZ was used in monotherapy or combined with conventional immunosuppressive drugs. The main indications for TCZ prescription were refractory uveitis (n=14) and refractory neurobehçet (n=2). After a median [IQR] follow-up of 20 [9-45] months using TCZ, neurological and ocular domains improved in most cases with complete remission in most patients with uveitis. Articular and peripheral venous manifestations also experienced a favourable evolution. However, oral/genital ulcers, skin lesions and intestinal manifestations followed a torpid course. CONCLUSIONS: TCZ is effective in BD with major clinical involvement. However, it does not seem to be effective in oral/genital ulcers or skin lesions.

Adalimumab in Elderly Patients with Non-Infectious Uveitis. Safety and Efficacy.

Purpose: To assess the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in elderly patients with noninfectious uveitis (NIU).Methods: An observational, retrospective, multicenter study was done. Changes in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), inflammatory activity parameters, central retinal thickness (CRT), and the occurrence of adverse events (AE) developed during follow-up were recorded.Results: A total of 82 eyes from 41 patients 60 years of age and older with noninfectious uveitis treated with adalimumab were included. A significant improvement in BCVA (71.5 to 75.4 letters, p = .001) and in CRT (311.1 µm to 265 µm, p = .001) was observed. Moreover, a significant decrease from baseline in the rate of patients with anterior chamber cell (ACC) >0+ (34.6% to 5.7%, p = <0.001) or vitreous haze>0+ (21.3% to 4.3%, p = .002) was determined. AEs were observed in 11 patients (26.8%).Conclusion: Adalimumab can be safe and efficacious for the treatment of NIU in patients 60 years of age and older.

Efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol in pregnant women with uveitis. Recommendations on the management with immunosuppressive and biologic therapies in uveitis during pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES: Clinicians often face the challenge of providing effective and safe therapy for pregnant women with uveitis. Certolizumab pegol (CZP) differs from other anti-TNFα agents due to its limited placental transfer. In this study we assessed the efficacy of CZP in pregnant women with uveitis. We also provided information on outcomes of pregnant women and neonates exposed to CZP. METHODS: We carried out a multicentre study of women with uveitis who received CZP during pregnancy and their neonates. The main visual outcomes were visual acuity (VA), intraocular inflammation and corticosteroid-sparing effect. Pregnancy outcomes, maternal and neonatal infections and congenital malformations were also assessed. RESULTS: We studied 14 women (23 affected eyes); mean age of 34.3±5.5 years. The underlying diseases were spondyloarthritis (n=7), idiopathic (n=2), and Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada, rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, punctate inner choroidopathy and Behçet's disease (1 each). The patterns of ocular involvement were anterior (n=10), posterior (n=2), intermediate (n=1), panuveitis (n=1). Cystoid macular oedema was present in one patient (1 eye). Uveitis was bilateral in nine cases and chronic in seven patients. CZP was started before getting pregnant in ten patients and after conceiving in four. All patients achieved or maintained ocular remission throughout pregnancy. Fifteen healthy infants were born. Only one woman presented a mild infection during pregnancy. Neither infections nor malformations were observed in neonates after a follow-up of 6 months. Six infants were breastfed and all of them received scheduled vaccinations without complications. CONCLUSIONS: Certolizumab pegol is effective and safe in women with uveitis during pregnancy.

Efficacy and safety of immunomodulatory drugs in patients with non-infectious intermediate and posterior uveitis, panuveitis and macular edema: A systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Non-infectious non-anterior uveitis (NINA) is a sight-threatening condition that often requires immunomodulatory drugs (IMDs) for its management. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the published evidence regarding the use of IMDs in adult patients with NINA uveitis including intermediate (IU) and posterior uveitis (PU), panuveitis (PanU) and macular edema (ME). METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review. Search strategies were designed for Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Libraries for articles up to 2019 to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the IMDs. A quality assessment was performed using the Jadad Scale. RESULTS: Nineteen randomized clinical trials were selected from the 1,103 articles retrieved. Characteristics of patients, treatment dosages and outcome measures were heterogeneous. The outcomes most frequently analyzed were visual acuity (VA), macular thickness and vitreous haze (VH). Different IMDs were used at their usual dosages. Methotrexate (MTX), micophenolate mofetil, cyclosporine A (CsA), tacrolimus, adalimumab and sarilumab were effective in NINA uveitis. Rituximab combined with MTX was effective in PU. Interferon-ß was superior to MTX, albeit with more adverse events in IU with ME. CsA was similar to cyclophosphamide (Cyc) in Behçet uveitis. Tacrolimus was safer and similar to CsA. Cyc was effective in serpiginoid choroiditis, but when combined with azathioprine in PU, but did not improve VA. Secukinumab did not prevent NINA uveitis recurrences, although intravenously it showed a higher response rate than when used subcutaneously. Daclizumab did not show any benefits in Behçet NINA uveitis. CONCLUSION: Several IMDs and their combinations can be useful in treating NINA uveitis. The available studies were heterogeneous regarding patient characteristics and outcomes.

Documento de recomendaciones sobre el tratamiento con inmunodepresores de la uveítis no anterior, no infecciosa, no neoplásica / Recommendations statement on the immunosuppressive treatment of non-infectious, non-neoplastic, non-anterior uveítis

OBJETIVO: Desarrollar recomendaciones basadas en la mejor evidencia disponible y experiencia sobre el uso de inmunomoduladores en pacientes con uveítis, las uveítis intermedias (UI), posteriores (UP) y panuveítis (PanU) no infecciosas, no neoplásicas. MÉTODOS: Se seleccionó un grupo multidisciplinar de 5 expertos, que definió el alcance, usuarios y apartados del documento. Posteriormente, se realizó una revisión sistemática de la literatura sobre la eficacia y seguridad de los inmunomoduladores en pacientes con UI, UP y PanU no infecciosa, no neoplásica. Se generaron 34 recomendaciones en base a la evidencia encontrada en la revisión sistemática y a la experiencia de los expertos. Mediante la metodología Delphi, el grado de acuerdo con las recomendaciones se extendió a 25 expertos más que votaron según una escala de 1 (total desacuerdo) a 10 (total acuerdo). El acuerdo se definió como una puntuación ≥ 7 en al menos el 70% de los participantes. El nivel de evidencia y grado de recomendación se clasificaron según el modelo del Center for Evidence Based Medicine de Oxford. RESULTADOS: Se aceptaron las 34 recomendaciones generadas tras 2 rondas Delphi (se modificaron 3 recomendaciones). Se incluyen recomendaciones específicas para pacientes con UI, UP y PanU no infecciosa, no neoplásica, así como para distintas líneas de tratamiento. CONCLUSIONES: En los pacientes con UI, UP y PanU no infecciosas, no neoplásicas, estas recomendaciones pueden ayudar en la toma de decisiones terapéuticas, dada la ausencia de estudios con potencia estadística suficiente, u otros algoritmos universalmente aceptados sobre los que apoyar dichas decisiones

OBJECTIVE: To generate recommendations on the use of immunomodulators in patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic intermediate uveitis (IU), posterior uveitis (PU) and panuveitis (PanU) based on best evidence and experience. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of 5 experts was established, who defined the scope, users, and sections of the document. A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of immunomodulatory drugs in patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic, non-anterior uveitis. The results of the SLR were presented and discussed during an expert meeting in which 34 recommendations were generated. The level of agreement with the recommendations was also tested in 25 additional experts following a Delphi process. Recommendations were voted from 1 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement if at least 70% of the experts voted ≥ 7. The level of evidence and grade or recommendation were assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. RESULTS: The SLR included 33 articles. The 34 recommendations were accepted after 2 Delphi rounds (3 of them were modified after the first round). They include specific recommendations on patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic, PU and PanU, as well as different treatment guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic, non-anterior uveitis these recommendations might help treatment decision making, due to the lack of robust evidence or other globally accepted algorithms

Recomendaciones para la atención oftalmológica durante el estado de alarma por la pandemia de enfermedad por coronavirus COVID-19 / Recommendations for eye care during the alarm state bythe coronavirus disease pandemic COVID-19

OBJETIVO: Minimizar la exposición al virus SARS-CoV-2, reducir las posibilidades de transmisión cruzada entre pacientes y personal sanitario, y evitar el desarrollo de complicaciones postoperatorias por la atención a pacientes con enfermedades oculares durante la pandemia de Enfermedad por Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). MÉTODOS: Elaboración de un documento de revisión del estado del conocimiento sobre COVID-19 y consenso entre diferentes sociedades oftalmológicas españolas y afines, al objeto de proporcionar guías y recomendaciones de máximos recursos primariamente condicionadas por el estado de alerta, confinamiento y distanciamiento social que acontece en España desde el 16 de marzo de 2020. RESULTADOS: Las recomendaciones promoverán la adopción de medidas de actuación y protección para el desarrollo de la actividad asistencial en consultas externas, área quirúrgica y hospitalización, tanto para pacientes no confirmados - asintomáticos y sintomáticos - como confirmados de COVID-19. Deberán ser adaptadas a las circunstancias y disponibilidad de Equipos de Protección Individual (EPI) en cada uno de los Centros y Comunidades Autónomas, debiendo ser actualizadas en función de las fases de la pandemia y de las medidas que adopte el Gobierno de la Nación. CONCLUSIONES: Durante la pandemia COVID-19, la atención a los potenciales riesgos de salud para la población ocasionados por el coronavirus deberá prevalecer sobre la posible progresión de enfermedades oculares comunes. Tanto médicos oftalmólogos como restantes profesionales de la salud ocular deberán asumir una posible progresión de dichas enfermedades ante la imposibilidad de un seguimiento adecuado de los pacientes

OBJECTIVE: Minimize exposure to the SARS-CoV-2, reduce the chances of cross-transmission between patients and healthcare personnel, and prevent the development of postoperative complications from the management of patients with eye diseases during the 2019 coronavirus disease pandemic (COVID -19). METHODS: COVID-19 literature review and consensus establishment between different Spanish ophthalmology societies in order to provide guidelines and recommendations of máximum resources primarily conditioned by the state of alert, confinement and social distancing that occurs in Spain since March 16, 2020. Results: The recommendations will promote the adoption of action and protection measures for eye care in outpatient clinics, surgical areas and hospitalization, for unconfirmed (asymptomatic and symptomatic) and confirmed COVID-19 patients. Measures must be adapted to the circumstances and availability of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in each of the centers and Autonomous Communities, which will be updated according to the pandemic phases and the measures adopted by the Spanish Government. Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic, attention to the potential health risks to the population caused by coronavirus should prevail over the possible progression of the common eye diseases. Ophthalmologists and other eye care professionals must assume a possible progression of these diseases due to the impossibility of adequate patient follow-up

Recommendations statement on the immunosuppressive treatment of non-infectious, non-neoplastic, non-anterior uveitis. / Documento de recomendaciones sobre el tratamiento con inmunodepresores de la uveítis no anterior, no infecciosa, no neoplásica.

OBJECTIVE: To generate recommendations on the use of immunomodulators in patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic intermediate uveitis (IU), posterior uveitis (PU) and panuveitis (PanU) based on best evidence and experience. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of 5 experts was established, who defined the scope, users, and sections of the document. A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of immunomodulatory drugs in patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic, non-anterior uveitis. The results of the SLR were presented and discussed during an expert meeting in which 34 recommendations were generated. The level of agreement with the recommendations was also tested in 25 additional experts following a Delphi process. Recommendations were voted from 1 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement if at least 70% of the experts voted ≥7. The level of evidence and grade or recommendation were assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. RESULTS: The SLR included 33 articles. The 34 recommendations were accepted after 2 Delphi rounds (3 of them were modified after the first round). They include specific recommendations on patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic, PU and PanU, as well as different treatment guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with non-infectious, non-neoplastic, non-anterior uveitis these recommendations might help treatment decision making, due to the lack of robust evidence or other globally accepted algorithms.

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.

Discontinuation and nonpublication of interventional clinical trials conducted in ophthalmology.

OBJECTIVE: Discontinuation of interventional clinical trials and nonpublication of completed trials represent a waste of already scarce resources. We sought to identify the prevalence of discontinuation and nonpublication of interventional clinical trials conducted in ophthalmology patients. METHODS: A retrospective, cross-sectional study of ophthalmology-based interventional clinical trials in ClinicalTrials.gov dating back to 1972 was conducted. χ2 tests were used to determine any potential associations between trial characteristics and trial completion. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare median time to publication between academic and industry-sponsored trials. RESULTS: Of 2926 included trials, 413 (14%) were discontinued early with only 19 of these studies being published. A total of 2027 (81%) of the 2513 completed trials were not published. A total of 277 419 participants were enrolled in unpublished, completed trials, whereas an estimated 20 843 participants were enrolled in trials that were never completed and never to led to publication. The odds of study discontinuation among industry-sponsored trials were 27% greater than government/academia-sponsored (National Institutes of Health, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, U.S. and foreign university-based teaching hospitals) trials (odds ratio [OR] = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.57, p = 0.03). Furthermore, the odds of nonpublication among industry-sponsored trials were 55% more than those funded by government/academia (OR = 1.55, 95% CI 1.27-1.89, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The nonpublication of many completed trials and of preliminary results of trials that are discontinued early dilutes the quality and decreases the comprehensive nature of the medical literature. This occurs in both industry and academia. Greater transparency through the publication of the entire spectrum of clinical trials' results as well as those that are terminated early could minimize publication bias and thus lead to a more robust medical literature.

Comparative Study of Infliximab Versus Adalimumab in Refractory Uveitis due to Behçet's Disease: National Multicenter Study of 177 Cases.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of infliximab (IFX) versus adalimumab (ADA) as a first-line biologic drug over 1 year of treatment in a large series of patients with refractory uveitis due to Behçet's disease (BD). METHODS: We conducted an open-label multicenter study of IFX versus ADA for BD-related uveitis refractory to conventional nonbiologic treatment. IFX or ADA was chosen as the first-line biologic agent based on physician and patient agreement. Patients received 3-5 mg/kg intravenous IFX at 0, 2, and 6 weeks and every 4-8 weeks thereafter, or 40 mg subcutaneous ADA every other week without a loading dose. Ocular parameters were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: The study included 177 patients (316 affected eyes), of whom 103 received IFX and 74 received ADA. There were no significant baseline differences between treatment groups in main demographic features, previous therapy, or ocular sign severity. After 1 year of therapy, we observed an improvement in all ocular parameters in both groups. However, patients receiving ADA had significantly better outcomes in some parameters, including improvement in anterior chamber inflammation (92.31% versus 78.18% for IFX; P = 0.06), improvement in vitritis (93.33% versus 78.95% for IFX; P = 0.04), and best-corrected visual acuity (mean ± SD 0.81 ± 0.26 versus 0.67 ± 0.34 for IFX; P = 0.001). A nonsignificant difference was seen for macular thickness (mean ± SD 250.62 ± 36.85 for ADA versus 264.89 ± 59.74 for IFX; P = 0.15), and improvement in retinal vasculitis was similar between the 2 groups (95% for ADA versus 97% for IFX; P = 0.28). The drug retention rate was higher in the ADA group (95.24% versus 84.95% for IFX; P = 0.042). CONCLUSION: Although both IFX and ADA are efficacious in refractory BD-related uveitis, ADA appears to be associated with better outcomes than IFX after 1 year of follow-up.