Search

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety profile of filgotinib, a JAK1 preferential inhibitor, in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients included in Italian GISEA (Group for the Study of Early Arthritis) registry., Methods: Data from RA patients treated with filgotinib, recorded in the GISEA registry, were analysed. Disease activity scores and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed at baseline, as well as during 12-month follow-up. A difficult-to-treat (D2T) RA patient was defined according with EULAR criteria. Retention rate of filgotinib was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and factors influencing drug discontinuation were estimated by Cox regression models., Results: 246 RA patients (female 89%, 57.6±12.2 years old) started filgotinib, mostly as second (22%) or further (43.9%) b/tsDMARDs line of treatment. At 3 and 12 months, 18.8% and 27.5% of patients achieved Clinical Diseases Activity Index based remission and 30.1% and 37.7% obtained a visual analogue scale of pain ≤20 (all p<0.01 vs. baseline). Filgotinib survival rate was 84.5% at the 6-month and 75.8% at 12-month follow-up, and was comparable either in monotherapy or combination therapy, and irrespective of glucocorticoid intake. b/tsDMARD naive patients had the lowest hazard ratio (HR) of filgotinib discontinuation (HR 0.29, 95%CI 0.14-0.64), while D2T-RA the highest (HR 1.82, 95%CI 1.01-3.3). Eight patients (3.3%) discontinued filgotinib due to adverse events., Conclusions: In an Italian real-life setting, filgotinib is confirmed to be safe and with a good effectiveness profile both in monotherapy and without glucocorticoids.

Objectives: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), anti-interleukin-17 or interleukin-12/23 monoclonal antibodies (anti-IL) on comorbidities in a cohort of patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA), using an average treatment effect (ATE) analysis., Methods: SpA patients from the multicentre Italian GISEA Registry were divided into groups according to pharmacological exposure: no treatment (G0), TNFi (G1) and non-responders to TNFi switched to anti-IL (G2). In each group, we recorded the prevalence and incidence of infectious, cardiopulmonary, endocrinological, gastrointestinal, oncologic, renal and neurologic comorbidities. Each comorbidity was then fitted for ATE and baseline features were evaluated for importance., Results: The main findings of this study comprising 4458 SpA patients relate to cancer, other gastrointestinal diseases (OGID) and fibromyalgia. ATE showed no increased risk of solid cancer in G1 (0.42 95% CI 0.20-0.85) and G2 (0.26 95% CI 0.08-0.71) vs. G0, with significantly higher incidence in G0 (14.07/1000 patient-years, p=0.0001). Conversely, a significantly higher risk of OGID and fibromyalgia was found in G1 (1.56 95% CI 1.06-2.33; 1.69 95% CI 1.05-2.68, respectively) and G2 (1.91 95% CI 1.05-3.24; 2.13 95% CI 1.14-3.41, respectively) vs. G0. No treatment risk reduction was observed in haematological malignancies, cardiovascular events and endocrinological comorbidities., Conclusions: Overall, our study confirms the safety of TNFi and anti-IL in SpA patients, albeit with some caveats pertaining to solid cancers, OGID and fibromyalgia. Furthermore, taking into consideration causality with observational data may yield more reliable and relevant clinical information.

Background: Despite highly effective targeted therapies for rheumatoid arthritis, about 40% of patients respond poorly, and predictive biomarkers for treatment choices are lacking. We did a biopsy-driven trial to compare the response to rituximab, etanercept, and tocilizumab in biologic-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis stratified for synovial B cell status., Methods: STRAP and STRAP-EU were two parallel, open-label, biopsy-driven, stratified, randomised, phase 3 trials done across 26 university centres in the UK and Europe. Biologic-naive patients aged 18 years or older with rheumatoid arthritis based on American College of Rheumatology (ACR)-European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria and an inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were included. Following ultrasound-guided synovial biopsy, patients were classified as B cell poor or B cell rich according to synovial B cell signatures and randomly assigned (1:1:1) to intravenous rituximab (1000 mg at week 0 and week 2), subcutaneous tocilizumab (162 mg per week), or subcutaneous etanercept (50 mg per week). The primary outcome was the 16-week ACR20 response in the B cell-poor, intention-to-treat population (defined as all randomly assigned patients), with data pooled from the two trials, comparing etanercept and tocilizumab (grouped) versus rituximab. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. These trials are registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register, 2014-003529-16 (STRAP) and 2017-004079-30 (STRAP-EU)., Findings: Between June 8, 2015, and July 4, 2019, 226 patients were randomly assigned to etanercept (n=73), tocilizumab (n=74), and rituximab (n=79). Three patients (one in each group) were excluded after randomisation because they received parenteral steroids in the 4 weeks before recruitment. 168 (75%) of 223 patients in the intention-to-treat population were women and 170 (76%) were White. In the B cell-poor population, ACR20 response at 16 weeks (primary endpoint) showed no significant differences between etanercept and tocilizumab grouped together and rituximab (46 [60%] of 77 patients vs 26 [59%] of 44; odds ratio 1·02 [95% CI 0·47-2·17], p=0·97). No differences were observed for adverse events, including serious adverse events, which occurred in six (6%) of 102 patients in the rituximab group, nine (6%) of 108 patients in the etanercept group, and three (4%) of 73 patients in the tocilizumab group (p=0·53)., Interpretation: In this biologic-naive population of patients with rheumatoid arthrtitis, the dichotomic classification into synovial B cell poor versus rich did not predict treatment response to B cell depletion with rituximab compared with alternative treatment strategies. However, the lack of response to rituximab in patients with a pauci-immune pathotype and the higher risk of structural damage progression in B cell-rich patients treated with rituximab warrant further investigations into the ability of synovial tissue analyses to inform disease pathogenesis and treatment response., Funding: UK Medical Research Council and Versus Arthritis., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AF reports grants or contracts from Janssen, GSK, Mestag, Nascient, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Roche, and UCB, and consulting fees from Janssen and Sonoma. AGP reports grants or contracts from GSK, Pfizer, and Gilead, and consulting fees from Inflection Biosciences. CJE reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker's bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, BMS, Biogen, Celgene, Roche, Sanofi, and UCB Pharma; consulting fees from Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, and Eli Lilly; and support for attending meetings or travel from Eli Lilly. CP reports grants or contracts from GSK, Pfizer, BMS, Sanofi, Novartis, Janssen, Exagen, Genentech, and Navidea; trial funding from the UK Medical Research Council and Versus Arthritis; provision of investigational medicinal products for the trial from Pfizer and Roche; consulting fees from AbbVie, Janssen, Exagen, and Kinikska; and support for attending meetings or travel from EULAR, British Society for Rheumatology, and ACR. DvdH reports consulting fees from GSK, Pfizer, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, BMS, UCB Pharma, Novartis, Janssen, Argenx, Bayer, and Takeda; is an associate editor for Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, an editorial board member for the Journal of Rheumatology and RMD Open, an adviser for Axial Spondyloarthritis International Society, and Director of Imaging Rheumatology. EC reports grants or contracts from Pfizer, Biogen, Sanofi, and Bio-Cancer; consulting fees from Gilead, AbbVie, Biogen, Sanofi, UCB Pharma, Janssen, Fresenius Kabi, and R-Pharm; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker's bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Galapagos, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Sanofi, Fresenius Kabi, and Chugai Pharma; support for attending meetings or travel from Galapagos and UCB Pharma. EG reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker's bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer, Galapagos, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, BMS, Novartis, and Janssen. FR reports consulting fees from Ono Pharmaceutical. HC reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker's bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from GSK and UCB Pharma; consulting fees from Pfizer, Galapagos, and Argenx; and participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for AstraZeneca. IM reports grants or contracts from Pfizer, Gilead, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, BMS, UCB Pharma, Novartis, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Causeway Therapeutics, Cabaletta, Sanofi Regeneron, Evelo, Compugen, and Moonlake, and is a trustee for Versus Arthritis. JG reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker's bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer, Galapagos, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, UCB Pharma, Janssen, and Vifor. JPP reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker's bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer, AbbVie, Eli Lilly; consulting fees from AbbVie; support for attending meetings or travel from AbbVie and Eli Lilly; and participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for AbbVie. MRE reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker's bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from GSK, Galapagos, and AbbVie; support for attending meetings or travel from Eli Lilly, AbbVie, and Janssen; and consulting fees from GSK, Fresenius Kabi, and AstraZeneca. MHB reports grants or contracts from Gilead, and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker's bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Galapagos, AbbVie, and Boehringer Ingelheim. NN reports support for attending meetings or travel from Janssen. PD reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker's bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer, Galapagos, AbbVie, and Eli Lilly, and support for attending meetings or travel from Galapagos, AbbVie, and Fresenius Kabi. PCT reports consulting fees from GSK, Pfizer, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Biogen, Sanofi, UCB Pharma, Janssen, Fresenius Kabi, and Nordic Pharma; grants or contracts from Galapagos; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speaker's bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie; support for attending meetings or travel from Eli Lilly; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from Moonlake, Kymab, and Immunovant. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To evaluate the association between C-reactive protein (CRP) and 10-year risk of cardiovascular (CV) events using the Expanded Cardiovascular Risk Prediction Score for Rheumatoid Arthritis (ERS-RA), based on conventional and RA-specific risk factors but not CRP, in RA patients without previous cardiovascular events., Methods: ERS-RA was calculated in 1,251 "Cardiovascular Obesity and Rheumatic Disease Study (CORDIS)" database patients [(age 60.4(9.3) years; 78% female; disease duration, 11.6(8) years; CDAI, 9(9); CRP, 6.8(12) mg/L]., Results: The mean (SD) 10-year risk of CV events was 12.9% (10). After adjusting for the use of DMARDs and biologics, CRP concentrations were significantly associated with 10-year risk of CV events (coefficient=0.005 for each 10 mg/L CRP increment; 95%CI 0.000-0.111; p = 0.047). In mediation analysis, the association between CRP and ERS-RA was not explained by disease activity., Conclusion: In a large cohort of RA patients without previous cardiovascular events, a 20 mg/L increase in CRP concentrations was associated with a 1% increase in 10-year risk of CV events. This suggests that actively targeting residual inflammatory risk beyond conventional and RA-specific risk factors might further reduce CV event rates in RA patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interests All Authors report no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 European Federation of Internal Medicine. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Abstract: Identifying predictors of inadequate response to methotrexate (MTX) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is key to move from a "trial and error" to a "personalized medicine" treatment approach where patients less likely to adequately respond to MTX monotherapy could start combination therapy at an earlier stage. This study aimed to identify potential predictors of inadequate response to MTX in RA patients naïve to disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs.Data from a real-life cohort of newly diagnosed RA patients starting MTX (baseline, T0) as first-line therapy were analyzed. Outcomes, assessed after 6 months (T1), were defined as failure to achieve a disease activity score 28 (DAS28) low disease activity (LDA) or a good/moderate response to MTX, according to the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria. Logistic regression was used to assess the associations between baseline variables and the study outcomes.Overall, 294 patients (60.5% females, median age 54.5 years) with a median disease duration of 7.9 months were recruited. At T1, 47.3% of subjects failed to achieve LDA, and 29.3% did not have any EULAR-response. In multivariate analysis, significant associations were observed between no LDA and current smoking (adjusted odds ratio [adjOR] 1.79, P = .037), female gender (adjOR 1.68, P = .048), and higher DAS28 (adjOR 1.31, P = .013); and between no EULAR-response and current smoking (adjOR: 2.04, P = .019), age (adjOR: 0.72 per 10-years increases, P = .001), and higher erythrocyte sedimentation rate (adjOR: 0.49; P = .020). By contrast, there were no associations between past smoker status and study outcomes.In summary, in our real-life cohort of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug naïve RA patients, current smoking habit independently predicts inadequate response to MTX. This, together with other independent predictors of response to treatment identified in our study, might assist with personalized monitoring in RA patients. Further studies are required to investigate whether smoking quitting strategies enhance the therapeutic response to MTX., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: Although targeted biological treatments have transformed the outlook for patients with rheumatoid arthritis, 40% of patients show poor clinical response, which is mechanistically still unexplained. Because more than 50% of patients with rheumatoid arthritis have low or absent CD20 B cells-the target for rituximab-in the main disease tissue (joint synovium), we hypothesised that, in these patients, the IL-6 receptor inhibitor tocilizumab would be more effective. The aim of this trial was to compare the effect of tocilizumab with rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had an inadequate response to anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) stratified for synovial B-cell status., Methods: This study was a 48-week, biopsy-driven, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 randomised controlled trial (rituximab vs tocilizumab in anti-TNF inadequate responder patients with rheumatoid arthritis; R4RA) done in 19 centres across five European countries (the UK, Belgium, Italy, Portugal, and Spain). Patients aged 18 years or older who fulfilled the 2010 American College of Rheumatology and European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis and were eligible for treatment with rituximab therapy according to UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines were eligible for inclusion in the trial. To inform balanced stratification, following a baseline synovial biopsy, patients were classified histologically as B-cell poor or rich. Patients were then randomly assigned (1:1) centrally in block sizes of six and four to receive two 1000 mg rituximab infusions at an interval of 2 weeks (rituximab group) or 8 mg/kg tocilizumab infusions at 4-week intervals (tocilizumab group). To enhance the accuracy of the stratification of B-cell poor and B-cell rich patients, baseline synovial biopsies from all participants were subjected to RNA sequencing and reclassified by B-cell molecular signature. The study was powered to test the superiority of tocilizumab over rituximab in the B-cell poor population at 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was defined as a 50% improvement in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI50%) from baseline. The trial is registered on the ISRCTN database, ISRCTN97443826, and EudraCT, 2012-002535-28., Findings: Between Feb 28, 2013, and Jan 17, 2019, 164 patients were classified histologically and were randomly assigned to the rituximab group (83 [51%]) or the tocilizumab group (81 [49%]). In patients histologically classified as B-cell poor, there was no statistically significant difference in CDAI50% between the rituximab group (17 [45%] of 38 patients) and the tocilizumab group (23 [56%] of 41 patients; difference 11% [95% CI -11 to 33], p=0·31). However, in the synovial biopsies classified as B-cell poor with RNA sequencing the tocilizumab group had a significantly higher response rate compared with the rituximab group for CDAI50% (rituximab group 12 [36%] of 33 patients vs tocilizumab group 20 [63%] of 32 patients; difference 26% [2 to 50], p=0·035). Occurrence of adverse events (rituximab group 76 [70%] of 108 patients vs tocilizumab group 94 [80%] of 117 patients; difference 10% [-1 to 21) and serious adverse events (rituximab group 8 [7%] of 108 vs tocilizumab group 12 [10%] of 117; difference 3% [-5 to 10]) were not significantly different between treatment groups., Interpretation: The results suggest that RNA sequencing-based stratification of rheumatoid arthritis synovial tissue showed stronger associations with clinical responses compared with histopathological classification. Additionally, for patients with low or absent B-cell lineage expression signature in synovial tissue tocilizumab is more effective than rituximab. Replication of the results and validation of the RNA sequencing-based classification in independent cohorts is required before making treatment recommendations for clinical practice., Funding: Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme from the UK National Institute for Health Research., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2020 Société française de rhumatologie. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To compare the effect of achievement and maintenance of Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS) and clinical remission (CR) in preventing early damage accrual in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)., Methods: In a monocentric cohort of 116 newly diagnosed SLE patients, LLDAS and CR achievement at 6 months (T1) after treatment initiation and their maintenance over the next 12 months were assessed. Early damage was recorded after 18 months of follow-up (T2) using the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the association of LLDAS and CR with early damage., Results: LLDAS was significantly more attained than CR both at T1 (42.2% versus 21.6% of patients; P < 0.001) and T2 (46.6% versus 31.9%; P = 0.022). The overlap rate between persistent LLDAS and persistent CR was 41.7% (n = 15). On multivariate analysis, achievement of CR (odds ratio [OR] 0.07 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.01-0.59], P = 0.015) and LLDAS (OR 0.25 [95% CI 0.06-0.99], P = 0.049) at T1 were independently associated with lower accrual of early damage. Patients who achieved LLDAS (including CR) at T1 and steadily persisted in this condition until T2 developed significantly less damage compared to those who failed to maintain it during the T1-T2 interval (P = 0.003), those who achieved it later than T1 (P < 0.001), or those who had never been in this condition (P < 0.001)., Conclusion: Although CR is recommended as the primary treatment target in SLE, LLDAS represents a valid alternative in the early stage of SLE management. LLDAS and CR maintenance should be targeted to prevent damage., (© 2020, American College of Rheumatology.)

There is a current imperative to unravel the hierarchy of molecular pathways that drive the transition of early to established disease in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Herein, we report a comprehensive RNA sequencing analysis of the molecular pathways that drive early RA progression in the disease tissue (synovium), comparing matched peripheral blood RNA-seq in a large cohort of early treatment-naive patients, namely, the Pathobiology of Early Arthritis Cohort (PEAC). We developed a data exploration website (https://peac.hpc.qmul.ac.uk/) to dissect gene signatures across synovial and blood compartments, integrated with deep phenotypic profiling. We identified transcriptional subgroups in synovium linked to three distinct pathotypes: fibroblastic pauci-immune pathotype, macrophage-rich diffuse-myeloid pathotype, and a lympho-myeloid pathotype characterized by infiltration of lymphocytes and myeloid cells. This is suggestive of divergent pathogenic pathways or activation disease states. Pro-myeloid inflammatory synovial gene signatures correlated with clinical response to initial drug therapy, whereas plasma cell genes identified a poor prognosis subgroup with progressive structural damage., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To unravel the hierarchy of cellular/molecular pathways in the disease tissue of early, treatment-naïve rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and determine their relationship with clinical phenotypes and treatment response/outcomes longitudinally., Methods: 144 consecutive treatment-naïve early RA patients (<12 months symptoms duration) underwent ultrasound-guided synovial biopsy before and 6 months after disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) initiation. Synovial biopsies were analysed for cellular (immunohistology) and molecular (NanoString) characteristics and results compared with clinical and imaging outcomes. Differential gene expression analysis and logistic regression were applied to define variables correlating with treatment response and predicting radiographic progression., Results: Cellular and molecular analyses of synovial tissue demonstrated for the first time in early RA the presence of three pathology groups: (1) lympho-myeloid dominated by the presence of B cells in addition to myeloid cells; (2) d iffuse-myeloid with myeloid lineage predominance but poor in B cells nd (3) pauci-immune characterised by scanty immune cells and prevalent stromal cells. Longitudinal correlation of molecular signatures demonstrated that elevation of myeloid- and lymphoid-associated gene expression strongly correlated with disease activity, acute phase reactants and DMARD response at 6 months. Furthermore, elevation of synovial lymphoid-associated genes correlated with autoantibody positivity and elevation of osteoclast-targeting genes predicting radiographic joint damage progression at 12 months. Patients with predominant pauci-immune pathology showed less severe disease activity and radiographic progression., Conclusions: We demonstrate at disease presentation, prior to pathology modulation by therapy, the presence of specific cellular/molecular synovial signatures that delineate disease severity/progression and therapeutic response and may pave the way to more precise definition of RA taxonomy, therapeutic targeting and improved outcomes., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To establish evidence-based and experts' opinion filtered statements on the optimal treatment choice between cycling (switch) and changing mode of action strategies (swap) in RA patients failing TNF inhibitors (TNFis)., Methods: The relevant question (switch vs swap) was rephrased into a research question according to the population, intervention, comparison and outcome (PICO) strategy, considering all the available scientific evidence published from the 2013 EULAR set of recommendations up to mid-January 2016. Final statements derived from the retrieved scientific evidence and experts' consensus, with eventual rephrasing through a Delphi method during a national consensus of Italian rheumatologists., Results: From a total of 365 records, 12 studies were finally included. The final statements argued that, until head-to-head comparison data are available, switch and swap can be still considered suitable strategies in RA patients failing first TNFi, even though some data seem to lend more support to a different mode of action-targeted strategy., Conclusion: After failure of first TNFi course, switch and swap can be currently considered as alternative suitable approaches in RA patients.

Objectives: To update the 2011 Italian Society of Rheumatology (SIR) recommendations for the use of biologics and other novel agents in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA)., Methods: To create this new set of recommendations, the SIR "Spondyloartritis and Psoriatic Arthritis study group - A. Spadaro" went through the following steps: literature search, identification of the items of interests for each of the four previously identified clinical domains of PsA and the different treatment phases, achievement of the consensus on all topics, and generation of the recommendations., Results: An update on the available evidence on all of the biologics and new small molecules tested in PsA is reported, comprising the data for each of the individual articular manifestation. Indications for therapy inclusion criteria, choice of the drug, disease assessment, response definition, therapy failure management, and disease remission management for PsA peripheral joint arthritis, enthesitis, dactylitis, and spondylitis are provided. Suggestions for the treatment of patients with PsA and concomitant extra-articular manifestations are also given., Conclusions: These evidence-based recommendations may be used for guidance in the complex and fast-evolving field of the treatment of PsA.

Objective: To update the 2009 Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) treatment recommendations for the spectrum of manifestations affecting patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA)., Methods: GRAPPA rheumatologists, dermatologists, and PsA patients drafted overarching principles for the management of PsA, based on consensus achieved at face-to-face meetings and via online surveys. We conducted literature reviews regarding treatment for the key domains of PsA (arthritis, spondylitis, enthesitis, dactylitis, skin disease, and nail disease) and convened a new group to identify pertinent comorbidities and their effect on treatment. Finally, we drafted treatment recommendations for each of the clinical manifestations and assessed the level of agreement for the overarching principles and treatment recommendations among GRAPPA members, using an online questionnaire., Results: Six overarching principles had ≥80% agreement among both health care professionals (n = 135) and patient research partners (n = 10). We developed treatment recommendations and a schema incorporating these principles for arthritis, spondylitis, enthesitis, dactylitis, skin disease, nail disease, and comorbidities in the setting of PsA, using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation process. Agreement of >80% was reached for approval of the individual recommendations and the overall schema., Conclusion: We present overarching principles and updated treatment recommendations for the key manifestations of PsA, including related comorbidities, based on a literature review and consensus of GRAPPA members (rheumatologists, dermatologists, other health care providers, and patient research partners). Further updates are anticipated as the therapeutic landscape in PsA evolves., (© 2016, American College of Rheumatology.)

The pathogenesis of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is still under discussion but great advances have been made in the last 2 decades that confirm the central role of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) in its inflammatory milieu. New therapeutic approaches have been proposed, and new molecules with anti-TNF-α activity have been chemically altered to improve their pharmacological properties. Certolizumab pegol (CZP) is a PEGylated Fc-free anti-TNF that has been shown clinically to be effective in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), skin psoriasis, and PsA. This article summarizes available data on its clinical efficacy and safety profile in the treatment of patients with PsA.

We present an update on the effects of methotrexate (MTX), sulfasalazine (SSZ), leflunomide (LEF), and cyclosporine (CSA) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) by reviewing data published from January 2010 to June 2014. The most relevant study on MTX, the Methotrexate In Psoriatic Arthritis (MIPA) trial, did not show a significant difference between this drug and placebo in improving peripheral synovitis. The trial, however, had several limitations. A cohort study on a small number of patients found that MTX does not inhibit radiographic progression. In a large observational study, 86% of LEF-treated patients met PsA Response Criteria (PsARC) at Week 24. No studies of sufficient relevance on SSZ were published in the examined time frame. In an open-label trial, CSA alone was compared to adalimumab (ADA) alone and to the combination ADA/CSA. The ADA arms showed a significantly higher response rate, but as many as 65% of CSA-treated patients were PsARC responders at Month 12. No relevant data on the effects of these 4 drugs on psoriatic enthesitis, dactylitis, or spondylitis have recently been published, and no new safety signals have been reported. Observational data from 2 registers suggest that concomitant MTX increases the retention rate of tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors. The studies published in the examined time frame confirm that MTX, SSZ, LEF, and CSA have moderate symptom-modifying effect on psoriatic synovitis, and probably little effect on the other manifestations of PsA.

The use of biologic drugs has been linked with the paradoxical development of systemic and organ specific autoimmune processes. The aim of this study was to describe the features of biologics-induced autoimmune renal disorders (AIRD) through a systematic review and a cohort study of 707 adult patients affected with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), Ankylosing Spondylitis (SA) and Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA). The literature search identified 2687 articles of which 21 were considered relevant for the present study, accounting for 26 case reports. The cohort analysis retrieved 3 cases. According to clinical manifestations and kidney histology the identified AIRD cases were classified as: a) glomerulonephritis associated with systemic vasculitis (GNSV), b) glomerulonephritis in lupus-like syndrome (GNLS), c) isolated autoimmune renal disorders (IARD). Twenty-two out of 29 cases with AIRD were reported in patients affected by RA, 5 in AS and 2 in PsA. The biologic drug most frequently associated with development of AIRD was Etanercept (15 cases, 51.7%), followed by Adalimumab (9 cases, 31.0%) and Infliximab (3 cases, 10.3%) while Tocilizumab and Abatacept were reported in 1 case (3.4%) for each. Thirteen out of 29 (44.8%) cases were classified as affected by IARD, 12 (41.3%) as GNSV and 4 (13.9%) as GNLS. Worse prognosis was associated with GNSV and lack of biologic withdrawal. Although rare, AIRD may be life-threatening and may lead to renal failure and death. If AIRD occurs, biologic drugs must be stopped and patient should be treated according to clinical manifestations and kidney biopsy findings., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To investigate the effectiveness of etanercept on axial manifestations of a group of patients with established psoriatic arthritis (PsA)., Methods: This was a multicentre observational study. PsA was classified based on the CASPAR criteria. Inclusion criteria were refractory PsA with axial manifestations and suitability for anti TNF-α therapy. Effectiveness was defined according to the ASAS response criteria (BASDAI: 50% relative or absolute change of 20mm and expert opinion in favour of continuation), and on the improvements of BASFI, anthropometric measures, PASI, ESR and CRP at 12 months. PASI 50 and 75 were also assessed, as well as the ACR20 and ACR50 response criteria for patients with peripheral arthritis. Comparisons between baseline and after 12-month treatment were done using the Wilcoxon signed rank test for the end-points considered., Results: The study included 32 patients (25/7 M/F; median age 51yrs; 25th-75th percentiles: 34.5-58.7; median disease duration 14.5 yrs; 25th-75th percentiles: 9.2-17.00). Effectiveness of etanercept was observed in 72% of patients for the BASDAI (p<0.001), in 68% for the BASFI (p<0.001), in 76% for ESR (p<0.001) and in 68% of patients for CRP (p<0.01). The PASI improved in 72% of patients treated (p<0.0001), while PASI 50 and PASI 75 was reached in 81% and 55% of patients, respectively. ACR 20 and 50 was reached in 78 and 56% of patients with peripheral involvement respectively., Conclusions: The present study has shown that etanercept is effective on axial manifestations of established PsA, confirming the positive effects of anti TNF-α therapy on clinical manifestations of the disease.

Objectives: This study aims to evaluate in a real-life Italian multicenter cohort of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) (1) the 4-year effectiveness and safety of secukinumab, (2) the drug retention rate (DRR), and (3) the impact of the line of bDMARDs treatment, subtype of axSpA, and sex on achieving low disease activity (LDA) and very low disease activity (VLDA). Methods: Consecutive axSpA patients receiving secukinumab between 2016 and 2023 were prospectively evaluated. Data on disease characteristics, previous/ongoing treatments, comorbidities, and follow-up duration were collected. Treatment response was evaluated at 6 and 12 months after initiation and yearly up to 48 months (T48). DRR and effectiveness outcomes were evaluated according to bDMARDs treatment, axSpA subtype, and sex. Infections and adverse events (AEs) were recorded. Results: We enrolled 272 patients (48.2% male; median age, 51; 39.7% HLA-B27+; 40.4% nr-axSpA), of whom 30.9% were naïve to secukinumab. Overall, secukinumab yielded improvement in effectiveness outcomes; the naïve patients maintained lower disease activity vs. the non-naïve ones. At T48, the LDA and VLDA rates were higher in naïve patients and in male individuals. Treatment was discontinued in 104 patients due to primary/secondary loss of effectiveness and in 34 patients due to AEs. The DRR at T48 was 67.4% in the whole population, regardless of treatment line, axSpA subtype, and sex. Conclusions: Secukinumab was safe and effective in all axSpA patients irrespective of treatment line, disease subtype, and sex. The patients achieved sustained 4-year remission and DRR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To establish whether synovial pathobiology improves current clinical classification and prognostic algorithms in early inflammatory arthritis and identify predictors of subsequent biological therapy requirement.Methods: 200 treatment-naïve patients with early arthritis were classified as fulfilling RA1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria (RA1987) or as undifferentiated arthritis (UA) and patients with UA further classified into those fulfilling RA2010 ACR/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria. Treatment requirements at 12 months (Conventional Synthetic Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (csDMARDs) vs biologics vs no-csDMARDs treatment) were determined. Synovial tissue was retrieved by minimally invasive, ultrasound-guided biopsy and underwent processing for immunohistochemical (IHC) and molecular characterisation. Samples were analysed for macrophage, plasma-cell and B-cells and T-cells markers, pathotype classification (lympho-myeloid, diffuse-myeloid or pauci-immune) by IHC and gene expression profiling by Nanostring.Results: 128/200 patients were classified as RA1987, 25 as RA2010 and 47 as UA. Patients classified as RA1987 criteria had significantly higher levels of disease activity, histological synovitis, degree of immune cell infiltration and differential upregulation of genes involved in B and T cell activation/function compared with RA2010 or UA, which shared similar clinical and pathobiological features. At 12-month follow-up, a significantly higher proportion of patients classified as lympho-myeloid pathotype required biological therapy. Performance of a clinical prediction model for biological therapy requirement was improved by the integration of synovial pathobiological markers from 78.8% to 89%-90%.Conclusion: The capacity to refine early clinical classification criteria through synovial pathobiological markers offers the potential to predict disease outcome and stratify therapeutic intervention to patients most in need. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]