Cancer risk with tocilizumab/sarilumab, abatacept, and rituximab treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a Danish cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate cancer risk in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with tocilizumab/sarilumab, abatacept, or rituximab compared with those who received tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and compared with biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARD) naïve RA patients. METHODS: Nationwide registry-based cohort study of RA patients initiating treatment with tocilizumab/sarilumab, abatacept, rituximab, TNFi, and bDMARD-naive patients their second type of conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD). Patients were identified in DANBIO and followed for cancer from 2006-2020. Patients could contribute multiple treatments, with person years (PYRS), deaths, and cancers allocated to each treatment group in a 'latest type of treatment' manner. Inverse probability of treatment weighting and weighted cause-specific Cox models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for cancer in each tocilizumab/sarilumab, abatacept, and rituximab group compared with TNFI and bDMARD naïve groups, respectively. RESULTS: In total, 21 982 treatment initiations, 96 475 PYRS, and 1423 cancers were identified. There were no statistically significant increased HRs for overall cancer in tocilizumab/sarilumab, abatacept, or rituximab treatment groups (HRs ranged from 0.7-1.1). More than five years of abatacept exposure showed a non-significantly increased HR compared with TNFi (HR 1.41, 95% confidence intervals CI 0.74-2.71). For hematological cancers, rituximab treatment showed non-significantly reduced HRs: vs TNFi (HR 0.09; 95%CI 0.00-2.06) and bDMARD-naïve (HR 0.13; 95%CI 0.00-1.89). CONCLUSION: Treatment with tocilizumab/sarilumab, abatacept, or rituximab in RA patients was not associated with increased risks of cancer compared with TNFi-treated and with bDMARD-naïve RA patients in a real-world setting.

Risk factors for thromboembolic events in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia in a general ward and requiring treatment with oxygen.

PURPOSE: To assess risk factors for arterial and venous thromboses (AVT) in patients hospitalized in general wards for COVID-19 pneumonia and requiring oxygen therapy. METHODS: Our study was based on three randomized studies conducted as part of the CORIMUNO-19 platform in France between 27 March and 26 April 2020. Adult inpatients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring at least 3 l/min of oxygen but not ventilation were randomized to receive standard care alone or standard care plus biologics. Patients were followed up for 3 months, and adverse events were documented. Risk factor for AVT and bleeding was identified by analyzing clinical, laboratory, and treatment data at baseline among the 315 patients with complete datasets. A Fine and Gray model was used to take account of competing events. RESULTS: During the 3-month follow-up period, 39 AVT occurred in 38 (10%) of the 388 patients: 26 deep vein thromboses and/or pulmonary embolisms in 25 (6%) patients, and 14 arterial thrombotic events in 13 (3%) patients. A history of diabetes at inclusion [sHR (95% CI) = 2.65 (1.19-5.91), P = .017] and the C-reactive protein (CRP) level (sHR = 1 [1-1.01], P = .049) were significantly associated with an elevated risk of thrombosis. Obesity was not associated with a higher risk of thrombosis (sHR = 1.01 [0.4-2.57], P = .98). The CRP level and diabetes were not risk factors for hemorrhage. CONCLUSION: Among patients hospitalized in general wards for COVID-19 pneumonia during the first wave of the epidemic, diabetes (but not obesity) and a high CRP level were risk factors for AVT. The use of higher doses of anticoagulant in these high-risk patients could be considered.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab, sarilumab, and olokizumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the relative efficacy and safety of olokizumab, tocilizumab, and sarilumab in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who were intolerant or responding inadequately to methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the efficacy and safety of olokizumab, tocilizumab, and sarilumab in RA patients who were intolerant or responding inadequately to MTX. RESULTS: Six RCTs comprising 4439 patients met the inclusion criteria. Tocilizumab, sarilumab, olokizumab, and adalimumab treatments achieved a significant American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate compared with placebo. However, tocilizumab was associated with the most favorable surface area using the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) for the ACR20 response rate. The ranking probability based on the SUCRA indicated that tocilizumab treatment had the highest probability of providing the best ACR20 response rate, followed by sarilumab, olokizumab every 2 weeks (Q2W), olokizumab Q4W, adalimumab 40 mg, and placebo. The ACR50 and 70 response rates showed a distribution pattern similar to that of the ACR20 response rate. However, olokizumab Q4W had a higher ranking probability than olokizumab Q2W. The SUCRA rating showed that the placebo was the best intervention with the least adverse events (AEs) and withdrawal due to AEs, followed by interleukin­6 inhibitors. CONCLUSION: Tocilizumab, sarilumab, and olokizumab are more effective than adalimumab and have similar efficacy and safety in RA patients with inadequate responses to MTX.

Efficacy of sarilumab and dexamethasone co-administration for lowering multiple blood biomarkers in the treatment of cytokine release syndrome in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

The current study was planned to explore the potential synergistic role of the co-administration of sarilumab and dexamethasone in reducing blood biomarkers associated with cytokine release syndrome in hospitalised patients of coronavirus disease-2019. The sample comprised 22 patients hospitalised with severe and critical severity levels and who were treated with sarilumab and dexamethasone. Positive responses were seen in blood biomarkers, including decreased interleukin-6 alpha levels and improved oxygen saturation. Tumour necrosis factor, Ddimer, C-reactive protein, ferritin and lymphocyte count also showed positive responses in patients who survived than those who died. Lactate dehydrogenase levels fluctuated with improvement among the survivors, but had limited effectiveness in those who died. The findings suggested promising avenues for future treatment strategies in patients with severe coronavirus disease-2019 and cytokine release syndrome.

Safety and effectiveness of sarilumab in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis refractory to previous treatments: An interim analysis of a post-marketing surveillance.

OBJECTIVES: An interim analysis of post-marketing surveillance data to assess the safety and effectiveness of sarilumab in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis refractory to previous treatment. METHODS: The interim analysis included patients who initiated sarilumab therapy between June 2018 and January 2021. The primary objective of this surveillance was safety. RESULTS: In total, 1036 patients were enrolled and registered by 12 January 2021 (interim cut-off date). Of these, 678 were included in the safety analysis [75.4% female; mean age (± standard deviation) 65.8 ± 13.0 years]. Adverse drug reactions, defined as adverse events classified as possibly or probably related to sarilumab, were reported in 170 patients (incidence: 25.1%), with white blood cell count decreased (4.4%) and neutrophil count decreased (1.6%) most frequently reported. Serious haematologic disorders (3.4%) and serious infections (including tuberculosis) (2.5%) were the most frequently reported priority surveillance items. No malignant tumour was reported. An absolute neutrophil count (ANC) below the minimum standard value did not increase the incidence of serious infections. CONCLUSIONS: Sarilumab was well tolerated, and no new safety signals were noted in this analysis. There was no difference in the frequency of serious infections between patients with an ANC below or above normal.

Safety of sarilumab in a Japanese population with rheumatoid arthritis by age group: Data from an interim analysis of a post-marketing surveillance study.

OBJECTIVES: Using data from a post-marketing surveillance, this interim subgroup analysis investigated the safety of sarilumab in younger (<65 years) and older patients (≥65 and ≥75 years) with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: During this interim analysis, patients who were treated with sarilumab in Japan were enrolled between June 2018-2021. Data collected by 12 January 2022 were analysed, with adverse drug events monitored over 52 weeks. RESULTS: Of 972 patients with available data, proportion of patients aged <65 years, ≥65 years and ≥75 years were 40.8%, 59.2% and 27.8%, respectively. Most patients (95.5%) received the standard 200 mg dose of sarilumab as the initial dose. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 24.6% of patients, with serious events accounting for 6.4% of cases. No malignancy and low incidences of adverse drug reactions of special interest were reported across all age groups (<65 years, 7.8%; ≥65 years, 8.2%; ≥75 years, 8.5%). When stratified by absolute neutrophil count above and below the lower limit of normal, there were no numerical differences in incidences of serious and non-serious infections between age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of age, sarilumab therapy was well tolerated by patients with rheumatoid arthritis, with no new safety signals reported in this study.

Disproportionate articular pain is a frequent phenomenon in rheumatoid arthritis and responds to treatment with sarilumab.

OBJECTIVES: In some patients with RA, joint pain is more severe than expected based on the amount of joint swelling [referred to as disproportionate articular pain (DP)]. We assessed DP prevalence and the effects of sarilumab, an IL-6 inhibitor, on DP. METHODS: Data from RA patients treated with placebo or 200 mg sarilumab in the phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) MOBILITY and TARGET, adalimumab 40 mg or sarilumab 200 mg in the phase 3 RCT MONARCH and sarilumab 200 mg in open-label extensions (OLEs) were used. DP was defined as an excess tender 28-joint count (TJC28) over swollen 28-joint count (SJC28) of ≥7 (TJC28 - SJC28 ≥ 7). Treatment response and disease activity were determined for patients with and without DP. RESULTS: Of 1531 sarilumab 200 mg patients from RCTs, 353 (23%) had baseline DP. On average, patients with DP had higher 28-joint DAS using CRP (DAS28-CRP) and pain scores than patients without DP, whereas CRP levels were similar. After 12 and 24 weeks, patients with baseline DP treated with sarilumab were more likely to be DP-free than those treated with placebo or adalimumab. In RCTs, more sarilumab-treated patients achieved low disease activity vs comparators, regardless of baseline DP status. In OLEs, patients were more likely to lose rather than gain DP status. CONCLUSION: About one-quarter of patients with RA experienced DP, which responded well to sarilumab. These data support the concept that other mechanisms (potentially mediated via IL-6) in addition to inflammation may contribute to DP in RA. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: NCT01061736, NCT02332590, NCT01709578, NCT01146652.

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal trial of sarilumab for the treatment of glucocorticoid-dependent sarcoidosis.

OBJECTIVES: Effective steroid-sparing therapies for the treatment of sarcoidosis are lacking; interleukin-6 (IL-6) antagonists may reduce sarcoidosis disease activity. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of the IL-6 receptor antagonist, sarilumab, in subjects with glucocorticoid-dependent sarcoidosis. METHODS: This phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal trial enrolled 15 subjects with biopsy-proven sarcoidosis at Stanford University from November 2019 to September 2022. In Period 1, subjects were treated with open-label sarilumab 200mg subcutaneously every two weeks for 16 weeks, with predefined tapering of prednisone. Subjects who completed Period 1 without a sarcoidosis flare entered Period 2 and were randomized to continue sarilumab or to receive matching placebo for 12 weeks. Endpoints included flare-free survival, as well as changes in pulmonary function tests, chest imaging, patient reported outcomes, and laboratory values. RESULTS: Fifteen subjects were enrolled in the study (median age 57 years, 80% male, 73.3% White), and 10 subjects successfully completed Period 1. During Period 1, 4 of 15 subjects (26.7%) discontinued due to worsening of their sarcoidosis, and CT chest imaging worsened in 5 of 15 subjects (35.7%). During Period 2, 0 of 2 subjects in the sarilumab group and 1 of 8 subjects (12.5%) in the placebo group had a flare. Treatment with sarilumab 200 mg was generally well tolerated in subjects with sarcoidosis. CONCLUSION: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal trial, a meaningful signal for improvement in subjects with sarcoidosis treated with sarilumab was not observed. Given the small numbers in this study, no definitive conclusions can be drawn. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04008069.

Safety and Outcomes With Combination Therapy With Sarilumab and Baricitinib for Severe COVID-19 Respiratory Infection in Cancer Patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to describe the clinical outcomes of combination therapy with sarilumab and baricitinib for severe novel Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) infection in cancer patients. With this study, we aim to evaluate the role of expanded immunotherapy for severely ill patients with COVID-19 respiratory infections with limited options. The secondary objective is to assess the safety of combination therapy with sarilumab and baricitinib for severe COVID-19 infection. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to Moffitt Cancer Center with COVID-19 infection between January 2020 and April 2022. Our research received a waiver to sign consent by the patients according to our institutional IRB because it was free of any risk for the patients and respected the patient's privacy. Following the Institutional IRB approval and relevant Equator guidelines, we collected information on patients with severe COVID-19 infection and received sarilumab and baricitinib. We evaluated the survival rate and safety of combination therapy. All the patient's information was de-identified to protect their information according to Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). RESULTS: Four patients were included in the data analysis. Two survived, and two of them died (Table 1). All the patients that survived were previously vaccinated. Among the two patients who died, one was vaccinated, and the other was unvaccinated. All the patients tolerated the combination therapy well, and none of the patients who survived developed secondary infections or COVID-19-associated complications beyond 12 months of discharge. CONCLUSION: Our study explores the potential safe combination use of different immune modulators targeting multiple pathways of the inflammatory cascade for severe and refractory COVID-19 respiratory infections in high-risk oncology patients. The small number of patients in our observational study was a limitation. A larger sample of patients will be needed to conclude more precisely the efficacy of the combination therapy of sarilumab and baricitinib for refractory cases of severe COVID-19 respiratory infection. Moreover, exploring other cytokine release signaling pathway targets may be the key to significantly reducing inflammation and further pulmonary fibrosis with chronic unbearable respiratory sequela.

Efficacy and secondary infection risk of tocilizumab, sarilumab and anakinra in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

As the pandemic progresses, the pathophysiology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is becoming clearer and the potential for immunotherapy is increasing. However, clinical efficacy and safety of immunosuppressants (including tocilizumab, sarilumab and anakinra) treatment in COVID-19 patients are not yet known. We searched PubMed, Embase Medline, Web of Science and MedRxiv using specific search terms in studies published from 1 January 2020 to 20 December 2020. In total, 33 studies, including 3073 cases and 6502 controls, were selected for meta-analysis. We found that immunosuppressant therapy significantly decreased mortality in COVID-19 patients on overall analysis (odds ratio = 0.71, 95% confidence interval = 0.57-0.89, p = 0.004). We also found that tocilizumab and anakinra significantly decreased mortality in patients without any increased risk of secondary infection. In addition, we found similar results in several subgroups. However, we found that tocilizumab therapy significantly increased the risk of fungal co-infections in COVID-19 patients. This represents the only systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and secondary infection risk of immunosuppressant treatment in COVID-19 patients. Overall, immunosuppressants significantly decreased mortality but had no effect on increased risk of secondary infections. Our analysis of tocilizumab therapy showed a significantly increased risk of fungal co-infections in these patients.

Interleukin-6 and Macular Edema: A Review of Outcomes with Inhibition.

This paper describes the current literature on the molecular pathophysiology of interleukin-6 (IL-6) in the genesis of macular edema and on the outcomes with IL-6 inhibitors in the treatment of non-infectious macular edema. The role of IL-6 in the development of macular edema has been well elucidated. IL-6 is produced by multiple cells of the innate immune system and leads to a higher likelihood of developing autoimmune inflammatory diseases, such as non-infectious uveitis, through a variety of mechanisms. These include increasing the helper T-cell population over the regulatory T-cell population and leading to the increased expression of inflammatory cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha. In addition to being key in the generation of uveitis and subsequent macular edema through these inflammatory pathways, IL-6 also can lead to the development of macular edema through other pathways. IL-6 induces the production of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and facilitates vascular leakage by downregulating tight junction proteins in retinal endothelial cells. Clinically, the use of IL-6 inhibitors has been found to be efficacious primarily in the context of treatment-resistant non-infectious uveitis and secondary macular edema. IL-6 is a key cytokine in retinal inflammation and macular edema. It is thus not surprising that the use of IL-6 inhibitors in treatment-resistant macular edema in the setting of non-infectious uveitis has been well documented as an effective treatment option. The use of IL-6 inhibitors in macular edema secondary to non-uveitic processes has only begun to be explored.

Effect of sarilumab on unacceptable pain and inflammation control in Japanese patients with moderately-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis: Post hoc analysis of a Phase III study (KAKEHASI).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of sarilumab on unacceptable pain [UP; visual analogue scale (VAS) >40 mm] and inflammation in patients with moderately-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the KAKEHASI study, 243 patients received methotrexate with sarilumab 150 or 200 mg or placebo every other week, over 52 weeks. The proportion of patients with UP and correlations of changes in pain VAS from baseline with uncontrolled inflammation (C-reactive protein ≥1 mg/dl) and disease activity indices were assessed. RESULTS: Almost 80% of patients (192/243) had UP at baseline, including ∼60% of patients with uncontrolled inflammation. Among patients receiving sarilumab, inflammation decreased rapidly, with 90% of patients achieving controlled inflammation by Week 2, while 63.1% continued to have UP. The proportion of patients with UP further decreased by Week 16 (28.5%, sarilumab vs. 64.0%, placebo). By Week 52, only ∼10% of patients had UP. Changes in pain VAS correlated with most disease activity indices and patient-reported outcomes. However, marked correlations between changes in pain VAS and C-reactive protein were observed only at Week 16. CONCLUSION: Sarilumab treatment reduced UP and inflammation in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of single-dose subcutaneous sarilumab with or without methotrexate in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Two single-dose studies.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of single-dose subcutaneous (SC) sarilumab or tocilizumab SC ± methotrexate (MTX) and to assess the pharmacodynamics (PD) of sarilumab SC or tocilizumab SC monotherapy in Japanese rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. METHODS: TDU13402 was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-ascending dose Phase 1 study (NCT01850680). Twenty-four patients (6 per treatment group) received sarilumab 50, 100, or 200 mg plus MTX or placebo (2 per cohort) on Day (D) 1; PK and safety were assessed through D57. PDY14191 was a randomized, open-label, single-dose study (NCT02404558). Thirty patients (15 per arm) received sarilumab 150 mg or tocilizumab 162 mg on D1; PK, PD, and safety were assessed through D43. RESULTS: TDU13402: mean serum sarilumab exposure increased in a greater than dose proportional manner from 50 to 200 mg dose with no clinically meaningful increase in treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). PDY14191: PK profiles of single-dose sarilumab 150 mg or tocilizumab 162 mg were similar; some numerical differences in PD profiles and TEAEs were observed. Neutrophil count decrease/neutropenia was the most frequently reported TEAE with sarilumab treatment in both studies. CONCLUSIONS: PK, PD, and safety profiles of single-dose sarilumab SC with/without MTX were consistent with results anticipated in Japanese patients with RA.

Early Use of Sarilumab in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19 Pneumonia and Features of Systemic Inflammation: the SARICOR Randomized Clinical Trial.

The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of early treatment with sarilumab, added to standard of care (SOC), in hospitalized adults with COVID-19. Methods included phase II, open-label, randomized, controlled clinical trial of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and interleukin (IL)-6 levels ≥ 40 pg/mL and/or d-dimer > 1,500 ng/mL. Participants were randomized (1:1:1) to receive SOC (control group), SOC plus a single subcutaneous dose of sarilumab 200 mg (sarilumab-200 group), or SOC plus a single subcutaneous dose of sarilumab 400 mg (sarilumab-400 group). The primary outcome variable was the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring high-flow nasal oxygenation (HFNO), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIMV) or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) at day 28. One-hundred and 15 participants (control group, n = 39; sarilumab-200, n = 37; sarilumab-400, n = 39) were included. At randomization, 104 (90%) patients had supplemental oxygen and 103 (90%) received corticosteroids. Eleven (28%) patients in the control group, 10 (27%) in sarilumab-200, and five (13%) in sarilumab-400 developed the primary outcome (hazard ratio [95% CI] of sarilumab-400 vs control group: 0.41 [0.14, 1.18]; P = 0.09). Seven (6%) patients died: three in the control group and four in sarilumab-200. There were no deaths in sarilumab-400 (P = 0.079, log-rank test for comparisons with the control group). In patients recently hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia and features of systemic inflammation, early IL-6 blockade with a single dose of sarilumab 400 mg was safe and associated with a trend for better outcomes. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT04357860.).

Sarilumab monotherapy vs sarilumab and methotrexate combination therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Sarilumab, as monotherapy or in combination with conventional synthetic DMARDs, such as MTX, has demonstrated improvement in clinical outcomes in patients with RA. The primary objective of this post hoc analysis was to compare the efficacy of sarilumab (200 mg every 2 weeks) monotherapy (MONARCH study) with that of sarilumab and MTX combination therapy (MOBILITY study) at week 24. METHODS: The endpoints assessed were mean change from baseline in the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), 28-joint Disease Activity using CRP (DAS28-CRP), CRP, haemoglobin (Hb), pain visual analogue scale (VAS) and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-Fatigue. Least square (LS) mean change from baseline (95% CI) at week 24 for all endpoints was compared between the treatment arms for adjusted comparisons. RESULTS: This analysis included 184 patients on sarilumab monotherapy and 399 patients on sarilumab plus MTX. Differences (P < 0.05) were observed in ethnicity, region, body mass index group, rheumatoid factor, anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies, swollen joint count, CRP, CDAI and oral glucocorticoid use between these treatment groups. After adjusting for these differences in a mixed-effect model repeated measure, LS mean change from baseline for all assessments was similar between the treatment groups with overlapping CIs: CDAI, -28.79 vs -26.21; DAS28-CRP, -2.95 vs -2.81; CRP, -18.31 vs -16.46; Hb, 6.59 vs 8.09; Pain VAS, -33.62 vs -31.66; FACIT-Fatigue, 9.90 vs 10.24. CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrated that the efficacy of sarilumab monotherapy was similar to that of sarilumab and MTX combination therapy.

Drug-induced liver injury following the use of tocilizumab or sarilumab in patients with coronavirus disease 2019.

BACKGROUNDS: Interleukin-6 (IL-6) blockers including tocilizumab and sarilumab were approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in June 2021 for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe COVID-19. The use of sarilumab or tocilizumab in COVID-19 patients has been related to a reduction in mortality compared to standard care. Recent evidence has emerged concerning drug-induced liver injury (DILI) after sarilumab or tocilizumab applications in COVID-19 patients. AIMS: The study aimed to estimate DILI associated with sarilumab or tocilizumab in treating moderate to severe patients infected with SARS-Cov-2. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective pharmacovigilance study by data mining of the FDA's adverse event reporting systems (FAERS) database from the first quarter of 2004 to the fourth quarter of 2021 in confirmed COVID-19 patients. We analyzed DILI cases associated with tocilizumab or sarilumab in treating COVID-19 patients from the FAERS during this period. Disproportionality analysis and Bayesian analysis of COVID-19 patients were utilized for case analysis, and we also next compared the onset time and fatality rates of DILI following tocilizumab or sarilumab. RESULTS: A total of 275 cases of TCZ or SAR-related DILI reports were extracted. A total of 192 AEs cases were related to tocilizumab (TCZ), and 83 were related to sarilumab (SAR). In patients treated with TCZ, most were < 75 years old (51.57%), with more male than female (46.35% vs. 13.02%). The correlation between IL-6 receptor antagonists and DILI was stronger in SAR (ROR = 12.94; 95%CI 9.6-17.44) than in TCZ (ROR = 1.33; 95%CI 1.14-1.55). The onset time of DILI was different between TCZ and SAR, and a significant difference was observed in TCZ than SAR (P < 0.0001). A significant difference was observed in the mortality rate of TCZ and SAR (P = 0.0009). DILI associated with COVID-19 patients treated with TCZ appeared to have earlier onset-time (1(0-46) day) VS. SAR (3.5(0-27) day). CONCLUSION: This study shows strict monitor ought to be paid for TCZ or SAR when used for COVID-19 patients with poor liver function.

Drug dosing in hospitalized obese patients with COVID-19.

Obesity is highly prevalent in hospitalized patients admitted with COVID-19. Evidence based guidelines are available for COVID-19-related therapies but dosing information specific to patients with obesity is lacking. Failure to account for the pharmacokinetic alterations that exist in this population can lead to underdosing, and treatment failure, or overdosing, resulting in an adverse effect. The objective of this manuscript is to provide clinicians with guidance for making dosing decisions for medications used in the treatment of patients with COVID-19. A detailed literature search was conducted for medications listed in evidence-based guidelines from the National Institutes of Health with an emphasis on pharmacokinetics, dosing and obesity. Retrieved manuscripts were evaluated and the following prioritization strategy was used to form the decision framework for recommendations: clinical outcome data > pharmacokinetic studies > adverse effects > physicochemical properties. Most randomized controlled studies included a substantial number of patients who were obese but few had large numbers of patients more extreme forms of obesity. Pharmacokinetic data have described alterations with volume of distribution and clearance but this variability does not appear to warrant dosing modifications. Future studies should provide more information on size descriptors and stratification of data according to obesity and body habitus.

Immunogenicity of sarilumab and impact on safety and efficacy in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis: analysis of two Phase 3 randomised clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the immunogenicity profile of sarilumab in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients enrolled in the KAKEHASI and HARUKA studies were included in our analysis. In these studies, patients received sarilumab 150 mg or 200 mg every 2 weeks for 52 or 28 weeks in combination with methotrexate (MTX) (KAKEHASI), or for 52 weeks as monotherapy or in combination with non-MTX conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (HARUKA). Anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) and neutralising antibodies (NAbs) were assessed in the pooled population. RESULTS: Positive ADA assay responses occurred in 10/149 (7.1%) patients treated with sarilumab 150 mg and 13/185 (7.0%) patients treated with sarilumab 200 mg, with persistent responses in 2 (1.4%) and 4 (2.2%) patients, respectively. Peak ADA titre was 30. No patients treated with the 150 mg dose and one patient (0.5%) treated with the 200 mg dose exhibited NAbs. There was no evidence of an association between ADA formation and hypersensitivity reactions or reduced efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: ADAs, which occurred at a low frequency and titre, did not affect the safety or efficacy of sarilumab 150 or 200 mg administered as monotherapy or combination therapy in Japanese patients with RA in the KAKEHASI or HARUKA studies.

[Criteria for the optimal use of interleukin-6 receptor blockers in patients with COVID-19].

AIM: To determine the criteria for the optimal use of IL-6 receptor blockers in patients with COVID-19 community-acquired pneumonia based on predictors of adverse outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The single-center, non-randomized prospective study included 190 patients with community-acquired pneumonia caused by coronavirus 2 between the beginning of March and the end of May 2020. Of these, 89 patients received tocilizumab and 101 patients received sarilumab. The study inclusion criterion for the patient was indications for initiating therapy with one of the inhibitors of IL-6 receptors (anti-IL-6R) according to the Interim guidelines (versions 4 and 5). The exclusion criterion was the need to re-prescribe genetically engineered biological therapy (GEBT). The severity of the patient's condition was assessed according to the early warning score (NEWS2), the volume of lung tissue lesions was assessed according to computed tomography (CT). Laboratory monitoring included counting the absolute (abs) number of lymphocytes, serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin 6 (IL-6), D-dimer, lactate dehydrogenase, fibrinogen. Statistical data processing was conducted by nonparametric methods using the IBM SPSS Statistics V-22 software. RESULTS: The phenotype of a patient with a negative outcome prognosis was described: a male patient over 50 years of age with aggravated premorbid background (with cardiovascular diseases, obesity and/or chronic renal disease), lung lesion CT 34, saturation less than 93% upon inhalation of atmospheric air, persisting for 2448 hours after GEBT. According to the blood test, lymphopenia was below 1000 U/L and CRP levels were above 50 mg/L. The laboratory parameters and clinical picture of the patient progressively worsened after 911 days of illness, regardless of the use of Anti-IL-6R. The features of patients monitoring when administering IL-6 receptor blockers have been determined. CONCLUSION: IL-6 receptor blockers should be administered to patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 before the development of hyperinflammatory reactions. The optimal "therapeutic window" is 78 days of illness.

COVID-19: Consider IL-6 receptor antagonist for the therapy of cytokine storm syndrome in SARS-CoV-2 infected patients.

COVID-19 leads to mortality of several patients and the cytokine storm is reportedly critical in the patients. To reduce the cytokine storm, we would like to propose the interleukin (IL) 6 receptor (IL-6R) antagonist therapy for the COVID-19 patients. Two humanized monoclonal antibodies are in clinical trial following IL-6R antagonist therapies namely tocilizumab and sarilumab. However, researchers and physicians should look for more IL-6R antagonists for the therapy of cytokine storm syndrome severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infected persons to enhance the therapeutic options for cytokine storm.