Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases最新文献

Background: Targeted therapies have been associated with potential risk of malignancy, which is a common concern in daily rheumatology practice in patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) and a history of cancer.

Objectives: To perform a systematic literature review to inform a Task Force formulating EULAR points to consider on the initiation of targeted therapies in patients with IA and a history of cancer.

Methods: Specific research questions were defined within the Task Force before formulating the exact research queries with a librarian. We included studies reporting a relative risk measure of patients with a history of cancer initiating a targeted therapy or a conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD), regardless of the time since diagnosis of cancer. All relevant studies included in PubMed or Embase up to 15 July 2022 were included. Two reviewers independently performed standardised article selection, data extraction, synthesis and risk of bias assessment.

Results: 14 published articles and one ACR abstract fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All studies were high-quality observational studies, representing a median follow-up from treatment initiation of 4.52 years among 4428 patients and 15 062 patient-years of follow-up for new or recurrent cancer.All patients had a history of cancer, most frequently solid cancer, most frequently receiving treatment for rheumatoid arthritis and most frequently treated with tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors. Across these studies, the overall HR of cancer recurrence was 0.92 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.15) for patients receiving a targeted therapy versus a csDMARD.

Conclusion: Overall, the targeted therapies and clinical contexts covered by the included studies were not associated with an increased risk of cancer recurrence as compared with csDMARDs.

Background: Potential associations between targeted therapies and a new cancer in patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) and a previous malignancy are a frequent concern in daily rheumatology practice.

Objectives: To develop points to consider (PTC) to assist rheumatologists when initiating a targeted therapy in the context of a previous malignancy.

Methods: Following EULAR standardised operating procedures, a task force met to define the research questions for a systematic literature review and to formulate the overarching principles (OPs) and the PTC.

Results: The group formulated five OPs; seven PTC were formulated concerning the initiation of targeted therapies in patients with active IA and a previous malignancy in remission and one PTC concerning patients with active IA who were not in cancer remission. Major themes included (a) the need to assess the individualised risk of cancer recurrence based on the characteristics of the patient, cancer and the underlying disease; (b) the importance of engaging with specialists caring for cancer and defining treatment based on a shared decision between the patient and the rheumatologist; (c) the value of initiating without delay an appropriate targeted therapy for the treatment of the IA in patients in remission of their cancer; (d) the proposal to use Janus kinase inhibitors and abatacept with caution and in the absence of therapeutic alternatives, based on the absence of any data concerning their use in the context of previous malignancy.

Conclusion: The 2024 EULAR points to consider provide guidance on the management of targeted therapies in patients with IA and a previous malignancy.

Background: There is considerable practice variation in labelling, diagnosis and treatment of adults with sterile bone inflammation. We developed a expert consensus recommendations on the disease definition, diagnosis and treatment of this rare condition.

Methods: Systematic literature review and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations-based appraisal of evidence, two Delphi surveys and three digital and in-person consensus meetings with a multidisciplinary expert panel and patient representatives.

Results: A consensus disease definition was developed and the term 'chronic non-bacterial osteitis' (CNO) is proposed to describe adults with sterile bone inflammation. For initial imaging evaluation of adults with suspected CNO, the panel recommends MRI or otherwise CT combined with nuclear imaging. Whole-body imaging at initial evaluation can be considered for diagnostic and prognostic purposes. Suggested first-line treatment in adults with active CNO includes non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs/cyclooxygenase 2-inhibitors. Second-line treatment preferably consists of intravenous bisphosphonates, and otherwise tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors. Choice between them should be individualised, considering the presence of additional inflammatory features. The panel further discusses outcome measures, follow-up and management of adverse events and complications.

Conclusions and future perspectives: These expert consensus recommendations are intended to support healthcare professionals worldwide in their care for adults with CNO. They also lay the groundwork for establishing international patient registries, translational research lines and multicentre trials, all of which are urgently required.

Objective: To assess the efficacy/safety of ivarmacitinib, a selective Janus kinase (JAK) 1 inhibitor, in patients with moderate-to-severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs).

Methods: Patients were randomised (1:1:1) to receive either placebo (n=188), ivarmacitinib 4 mg (n=189) or ivarmacitinib 8 mg (n=189) once daily, with background csDMARDs allowed. After 24 weeks, patients on placebo switched to ivarmacitinib 4 mg for an additional 28 weeks, while those on ivarmacitinib continued their initial dosage. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving a 20% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR20) at week 24.

Results: At week 24, ACR20 response rates were significantly higher in the ivarmacitinib 4 mg (70.4%) and 8 mg (75.1%) groups compared with the placebo group (40.4%; both p<0.0001). Both ivarmacitinib doses achieved numerically higher Disease Activity Score 28-joint count C reactive protein of <2.6/≤3.2 response rates compared with placebo. Improvements in efficacy and patient-reported outcomes were sustained through 52 weeks and were noted in patients who switched from placebo after week 24. During the placebo-controlled period, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 81.5% and 90.5% of patients in the ivarmacitinib 4 mg and 8 mg groups, versus 79.3% in the placebo group. Infection-related TEAEs were slightly higher in the ivarmacitinib groups.

Conclusions: Ivarmacitinib may offer a potential therapeutic option for patients with RA who have an inadequate response to csDMARDs, with a safety profile that was generally manageable over 1 year of treatment and similar to other JAK inhibitors.

Trial registration number: NCT04333771.

Background: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a complex autoimmune disease characterised by autoreactive T and B lymphocytes. Sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) is involved in lymphocyte egress from peripheral lymphoid organs into the circulation. In phase 2a clinical trial, the potent, selective S1P₁ receptor modulator cenerimod reduced circulating antibody-secreting cells and interferon (IFN)-associated biomarkers.

Objectives: Pharmacodynamic effects of 2 and 4 mg cenerimod were evaluated in the phase 2b clinical trial (CARE) in moderate to severe patients with SLE (NCT03742037).

Methods: Blood samples were collected at baseline and after 6 months of treatment with cenerimod or placebo from CARE. The gene expression signatures for type 1 interferon (IFN-1), IFN-γ and plasma cells were used to assess dose-dependent pharmacodynamic effects of cenerimod. Cell-type deconvolution was performed to estimate cell abundance.

Results: Cenerimod 4 mg reduced IFN-associated protein and gene signature biomarkers after 6 months compared with placebo. A larger decrease of IFN proteins was evident in IFN-1 high patients compared with IFN-1 low patients. The median IFN-1 score in the IFN-1 high patients was reduced after 6 months of cenerimod 4 mg and the transition from IFN-1 low to high status compared with placebo was prevented. Cenerimod 4 mg exhibited a larger effect size on the pharmacodynamic biomarkers IFN-1, IFN-γ and plasma cells compared with cenerimod 2 mg.

Conclusions: This study further characterised the mechanism of action of cenerimod in patients with SLE and substantiated the scientific rationale for cenerimod 4 mg in the phase 3 clinical trials in moderate to severe SLE (OPUS-1/-2).

Objectives: To identify phenotype clusters and their trajectories in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and examine the association of the clusters with treatment response in a real-world setting.

Methods: In the multicentre PsA Research Consortium (PARC) study, we applied factor analysis of mixed data to reduce dimensionality and collinearity, followed by hierarchical clustering on principal components. We then evaluated the transition of PsA clusters and their response to new immunomodulatory therapy and tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi).

Results: Among 627 patients with PsA, three clusters were identified: mild PsA and psoriasis only (PsO) (Cluster 1, 47.4%), severe PsA and mild PsO (Cluster 2, 34.3%) and severe PsA and severe PsO (Cluster 3, 18.3%). Among 339 patients starting or changing, significant differences in response were observed (mean follow-up of 0.7 years, SD 0.8), with Cluster 3 showing the largest improvements in cDAPSA and PsAID. No differences were found among those starting TNFi (n=218). cDAPSA remission and PsAID patient acceptable symptom state were achieved in 10% and 54%, respectively. Clusters remained stable over time despite treatment changes, though some transitions occurred, notably from Cluster 3 to milder clusters.

Conclusion: Data-driven clusters with distinct therapy responses identified in this real-world study highlight the extensive heterogeneity in PsA and the central role of psoriasis and musculoskeletal severity in treatment outcomes. Concurrently, these findings underscore the need for better outcome measures, particularly for individuals with lower disease activity.

Background: The PEXIVAS (Plasma exchange and glucocorticoids in severe antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis) trial showed that a reduced-dose glucocorticoid regimen (redGC) was non-inferior to a standard-dose regimen (standGC) with respect to death or end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV). However, the primary endpoint did not include disease progression or relapse, cyclophosphamide was the main induction therapy and rituximab (RTX)-treated patients tended to have a higher risk of death or ESKD with redGC. We aimed to evaluate the real-world use of redGC.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective, multicentre study comparing PEXIVAS redGC with standGC in patients with AAV. The primary composite outcome was the occurrence of death, ESKD, AAV progression before remission or relapse within the 12 months following induction. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to correct for baseline imbalance between groups. Factors associated with the occurrence of the primary outcome were estimated.

Results: A total of 234 patients were included. The primary composite outcome occurred in 42/126 (33%) patients with redGC versus 20/108 (19%) with standGC. In unweighted multivariable analysis and in weighted analysis, redGC was independently associated with the primary outcome but not with death or ESKD. Among redGC-treated patients, those with serum creatinine>300 µmol/L were more likely to achieve the primary outcome. RTX-treated patients who received redGC were more likely to experience death or ESKD and to achieve the primary outcome.

Conclusion: In this study of patients with AAV primarily treated with RTX, redGC was associated with an increased risk of the primary outcome consisting of death, ESKD, AAV progression before remission or relapse.