User login
Antimalarials in pregnancy and lactation
According to the World Health Organization, there were about 219 million cases of malaria and an estimated 660,000 deaths in 2010. Although huge, this was a 26% decrease from the rates in 2000. Six countries in Africa account for 47% of malaria cases: Cote d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mozambique, Nigeria, Uganda, and the United Republic of Tanzania. The second-most affected region in the world is Southeast Asia, which includes Myanmar, India, and Indonesia. In comparison, about 1,500 malaria cases and 5 deaths are reported annually in the United States, mostly from returned travelers.
if they will be traveling in any of the above regions. Malaria during pregnancy increases the risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes, including maternal anemia, prematurity, spontaneous abortion, and stillbirth.
As stated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, no antimalarial agent is 100% protective. Therefore, whatever agent is used must be combined with personal protective measures such as wearing insect repellent, long sleeves, and long pants; sleeping in a mosquito-free setting; or using an insecticide-treated bed net.
There are nine antimalarial drugs available in the United States.
Atovaquone/Proguanil Hcl (Malarone and as generic)
This agent is good for last-minute travelers because the drug is started 1-2 days before traveling to areas where malaria transmission occurs. The combination can be classified as compatible in pregnancy. No reports in breastfeeding with atovaquone or the combination have been found. Proguanil is not available in the United States as a single agent.
Chloroquine (generic)
This is the drug of choice to prevent and treat sensitive malaria species during pregnancy. The drug crosses the placenta producing fetal concentrations that are similar to those in the mother. The drug appears to be low risk for embryo-fetal harm.
It is compatible in breastfeeding.
Dapsone (generic)
This agent does not appear to represent a major risk of harm to the fetus. Although it has been used in combination with pyrimethamine (an antiparasitic) or trimethoprim (an antibiotic) to prevent malaria, the efficacy of the combination has not been confirmed.
In breastfeeding, there is one case of mild hemolytic anemia in the mother and her breastfeeding infant that may have been caused by the drug.
Hydroxychloroquine (generic)
This agent is used for the treatment of malaria, systemic erythematosus, and rheumatoid arthritis. For antimalarial prophylaxis, 400 mg/week appears to be low risk for embryo-fetal harm. Doses used to treat malaria have been 200-400 mg/day.
Because very low concentrations of the drug have been found in breast milk, breastfeeding is probably compatible.
Mefloquine (generic)
This agent is a quinoline-methanol agent that does not appear to cause embryo-fetal harm based on a large number of pregnancy exposures.
There are no reports of its use while breastfeeding.
Primaquine (generic)
This agent is best avoided in pregnancy. There is no human pregnancy data, but it may cause hemolytic anemia in patients with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency (G6PD). Because the fetus is relatively G6PD deficient, it is best avoided in pregnancy regardless of the mother’s status.
There are no reports describing the use of the drug during lactation. Both the mother and baby should be tested for G6PD deficiency before the drug is used during breastfeeding.
Pyrimethamine (generic)
This agent has been used for the treatment or prophylaxis of malaria. Most studies have found this agent to be relatively safe and effective.
It is excreted into breast milk and has been effective in eliminating malaria parasites from breastfeeding infants.
Quinidine (generic)
Reports linking the use of this agent with congenital defects have not been found. Although the drug has data on its use as an antiarrhythmic, its published use to treat malaria is limited.
The drug is excreted into breast milk, but there are no reports of its during breastfeeding.
Quinine (generic)
This agent has a large amount of human pregnancy data (more than 1,000 exposures) that found no increased risk of birth defects. The drug has been replaced by newer agents but still may be used for chloroquine-resistant malaria.
The drug appears to be compatible during breastfeeding.
Mr. Briggs is clinical professor of pharmacy at the University of California, San Francisco, and adjunct professor of pharmacy at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, as well as at Washington State University, Spokane. Mr. Briggs said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Email him at [email protected].
According to the World Health Organization, there were about 219 million cases of malaria and an estimated 660,000 deaths in 2010. Although huge, this was a 26% decrease from the rates in 2000. Six countries in Africa account for 47% of malaria cases: Cote d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mozambique, Nigeria, Uganda, and the United Republic of Tanzania. The second-most affected region in the world is Southeast Asia, which includes Myanmar, India, and Indonesia. In comparison, about 1,500 malaria cases and 5 deaths are reported annually in the United States, mostly from returned travelers.
if they will be traveling in any of the above regions. Malaria during pregnancy increases the risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes, including maternal anemia, prematurity, spontaneous abortion, and stillbirth.
As stated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, no antimalarial agent is 100% protective. Therefore, whatever agent is used must be combined with personal protective measures such as wearing insect repellent, long sleeves, and long pants; sleeping in a mosquito-free setting; or using an insecticide-treated bed net.
There are nine antimalarial drugs available in the United States.
Atovaquone/Proguanil Hcl (Malarone and as generic)
This agent is good for last-minute travelers because the drug is started 1-2 days before traveling to areas where malaria transmission occurs. The combination can be classified as compatible in pregnancy. No reports in breastfeeding with atovaquone or the combination have been found. Proguanil is not available in the United States as a single agent.
Chloroquine (generic)
This is the drug of choice to prevent and treat sensitive malaria species during pregnancy. The drug crosses the placenta producing fetal concentrations that are similar to those in the mother. The drug appears to be low risk for embryo-fetal harm.
It is compatible in breastfeeding.
Dapsone (generic)
This agent does not appear to represent a major risk of harm to the fetus. Although it has been used in combination with pyrimethamine (an antiparasitic) or trimethoprim (an antibiotic) to prevent malaria, the efficacy of the combination has not been confirmed.
In breastfeeding, there is one case of mild hemolytic anemia in the mother and her breastfeeding infant that may have been caused by the drug.
Hydroxychloroquine (generic)
This agent is used for the treatment of malaria, systemic erythematosus, and rheumatoid arthritis. For antimalarial prophylaxis, 400 mg/week appears to be low risk for embryo-fetal harm. Doses used to treat malaria have been 200-400 mg/day.
Because very low concentrations of the drug have been found in breast milk, breastfeeding is probably compatible.
Mefloquine (generic)
This agent is a quinoline-methanol agent that does not appear to cause embryo-fetal harm based on a large number of pregnancy exposures.
There are no reports of its use while breastfeeding.
Primaquine (generic)
This agent is best avoided in pregnancy. There is no human pregnancy data, but it may cause hemolytic anemia in patients with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency (G6PD). Because the fetus is relatively G6PD deficient, it is best avoided in pregnancy regardless of the mother’s status.
There are no reports describing the use of the drug during lactation. Both the mother and baby should be tested for G6PD deficiency before the drug is used during breastfeeding.
Pyrimethamine (generic)
This agent has been used for the treatment or prophylaxis of malaria. Most studies have found this agent to be relatively safe and effective.
It is excreted into breast milk and has been effective in eliminating malaria parasites from breastfeeding infants.
Quinidine (generic)
Reports linking the use of this agent with congenital defects have not been found. Although the drug has data on its use as an antiarrhythmic, its published use to treat malaria is limited.
The drug is excreted into breast milk, but there are no reports of its during breastfeeding.
Quinine (generic)
This agent has a large amount of human pregnancy data (more than 1,000 exposures) that found no increased risk of birth defects. The drug has been replaced by newer agents but still may be used for chloroquine-resistant malaria.
The drug appears to be compatible during breastfeeding.
Mr. Briggs is clinical professor of pharmacy at the University of California, San Francisco, and adjunct professor of pharmacy at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, as well as at Washington State University, Spokane. Mr. Briggs said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Email him at [email protected].
According to the World Health Organization, there were about 219 million cases of malaria and an estimated 660,000 deaths in 2010. Although huge, this was a 26% decrease from the rates in 2000. Six countries in Africa account for 47% of malaria cases: Cote d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mozambique, Nigeria, Uganda, and the United Republic of Tanzania. The second-most affected region in the world is Southeast Asia, which includes Myanmar, India, and Indonesia. In comparison, about 1,500 malaria cases and 5 deaths are reported annually in the United States, mostly from returned travelers.
if they will be traveling in any of the above regions. Malaria during pregnancy increases the risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes, including maternal anemia, prematurity, spontaneous abortion, and stillbirth.
As stated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, no antimalarial agent is 100% protective. Therefore, whatever agent is used must be combined with personal protective measures such as wearing insect repellent, long sleeves, and long pants; sleeping in a mosquito-free setting; or using an insecticide-treated bed net.
There are nine antimalarial drugs available in the United States.
Atovaquone/Proguanil Hcl (Malarone and as generic)
This agent is good for last-minute travelers because the drug is started 1-2 days before traveling to areas where malaria transmission occurs. The combination can be classified as compatible in pregnancy. No reports in breastfeeding with atovaquone or the combination have been found. Proguanil is not available in the United States as a single agent.
Chloroquine (generic)
This is the drug of choice to prevent and treat sensitive malaria species during pregnancy. The drug crosses the placenta producing fetal concentrations that are similar to those in the mother. The drug appears to be low risk for embryo-fetal harm.
It is compatible in breastfeeding.
Dapsone (generic)
This agent does not appear to represent a major risk of harm to the fetus. Although it has been used in combination with pyrimethamine (an antiparasitic) or trimethoprim (an antibiotic) to prevent malaria, the efficacy of the combination has not been confirmed.
In breastfeeding, there is one case of mild hemolytic anemia in the mother and her breastfeeding infant that may have been caused by the drug.
Hydroxychloroquine (generic)
This agent is used for the treatment of malaria, systemic erythematosus, and rheumatoid arthritis. For antimalarial prophylaxis, 400 mg/week appears to be low risk for embryo-fetal harm. Doses used to treat malaria have been 200-400 mg/day.
Because very low concentrations of the drug have been found in breast milk, breastfeeding is probably compatible.
Mefloquine (generic)
This agent is a quinoline-methanol agent that does not appear to cause embryo-fetal harm based on a large number of pregnancy exposures.
There are no reports of its use while breastfeeding.
Primaquine (generic)
This agent is best avoided in pregnancy. There is no human pregnancy data, but it may cause hemolytic anemia in patients with glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency (G6PD). Because the fetus is relatively G6PD deficient, it is best avoided in pregnancy regardless of the mother’s status.
There are no reports describing the use of the drug during lactation. Both the mother and baby should be tested for G6PD deficiency before the drug is used during breastfeeding.
Pyrimethamine (generic)
This agent has been used for the treatment or prophylaxis of malaria. Most studies have found this agent to be relatively safe and effective.
It is excreted into breast milk and has been effective in eliminating malaria parasites from breastfeeding infants.
Quinidine (generic)
Reports linking the use of this agent with congenital defects have not been found. Although the drug has data on its use as an antiarrhythmic, its published use to treat malaria is limited.
The drug is excreted into breast milk, but there are no reports of its during breastfeeding.
Quinine (generic)
This agent has a large amount of human pregnancy data (more than 1,000 exposures) that found no increased risk of birth defects. The drug has been replaced by newer agents but still may be used for chloroquine-resistant malaria.
The drug appears to be compatible during breastfeeding.
Mr. Briggs is clinical professor of pharmacy at the University of California, San Francisco, and adjunct professor of pharmacy at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, as well as at Washington State University, Spokane. Mr. Briggs said he had no relevant financial disclosures. Email him at [email protected].
Nintedanib cut lung function decline in interstitial lung disease with systemic sclerosis
DALLAS – Nintedanib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, decreased by 44% the annual rate of lung function decline among patients with interstitial lung disease associated with systemic sclerosis, a year-long study has found.
In a placebo-controlled 52-week trial, forced vital capacity (FVC) in patients who took nintedanib (Ofev) declined by a mean of 52 mL – significantly less than the mean 93 mL decline seen among those who were given placebo, Oliver Distler, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American Thoracic Society.
“These are people in their mid-40s and -50s,” said Dr. Distler of the University of Zürich. “They have a long time to go. If there is an annual preservation of lung function by 40%, if you have that every year, it becomes very surely clinically significant. A decline in FVC is also a good surrogate marker of mortality in interstitial lung disease associated with systemic sclerosis. Assuming the effects are ongoing above the 1 year we looked at, then indeed these results are clinically important.”
The study was simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Nintedanib is already approved for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. But some data suggest that it also exerts antifibrotic and anti-inflammatory effects in animal models of systemic sclerosis and inflammatory lung disease (ILD). SENSCIS (the Safety and Efficacy of Nintedanib in Systemic Sclerosis trial) investigated the molecule’s use in patients with ILD associated with systemic sclerosis.
Conducted in 32 countries, SENSCIS comprised 576 patients with the disorder, whose sclerosis affected at least 10% of their lungs. They were assigned to 52 weeks of either placebo or 150 mg nintedanib twice weekly. However, patients stayed on their blinded treatment until the last patient enrolled had finished the year of treatment; some patients took the drug for 100 weeks, Dr. Distler said. The primary endpoint was annual rate of decline in the forced vital capacity (FEV). Secondary endpoints included changes of the modified Rodnan skin score and in the total score on the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire.
Patients were a mean of 54 years old, with a mean disease duration of about 3 years. About half had diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis; the sclerosis was limited in the remainder. The mean extent of lung fibrosis was about 36%. Half were taking mycophenolate at baseline, which was allowed as background treatment, along with up to 10 mg/day of prednisone. Any patient who experienced clinically significant lung function deterioration could receive additional therapy at the investigator’s discretion.
The mean baseline FEV for these patients was 72.5% of predicted value. The mean diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide was 53% of expected capacity.
Most patients completed the study (80% of the active group and 89% of the placebo group). The mean drug exposure duration was 10 months in the active group and 11 in the placebo group.
Improvement began early in treatment, with the efficacy curves separating by week 12 and continuing to diverge. After 52 weeks of therapy, the annual rate of change was 41 mL less in the active group than in the placebo group (–54.4 mL vs. –93.3 mL). The mean adjusted absolute change from baseline was –54.6 mL in the active group and –101 mL in the placebo at week 52. Significantly fewer patients taking nintedanib also lost more than 10% of FVC by week 52 (16.7% vs. 18%).
The St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score improved about one point in the active group and declined about one point in the placebo group.
Nintedanib was equally effective across a number of subgroups, including those divided by sex, age, and race. Antitopoisomerase antibodies and so-called antitopoisomerase I antibody status did not affect nintedanib’s action. Nintedanib also significantly improved scores on the Health Assessment Questionnaire without Disability Index and dyspnea.
More patients in the active group than in on placebo discontinued treatment because of a serious adverse event (16% vs. 8.7%). The most common of these were diarrhea (75.7% vs. 31%), nausea (31.6% vs. 13.5%), and vomiting (24.7% vs.10.4%). Skin ulcers occurred in about 18% of each group. Patients in the active group were significantly more likely to develop elevated alanine and aspartate aminotransferase of up to three times normal levels (4.9% vs. 0.7%).
Treatment did not significantly affect mortality rates, however. Over the treatment period, 10 patients in the nintedanib group and 9 in the placebo group died (3.5% vs. 3.1%).
The study was sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Distler was the primary investigator on the trial.
SOURCE: Distler O et al. ATS 2019, Abstract A7360.
DALLAS – Nintedanib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, decreased by 44% the annual rate of lung function decline among patients with interstitial lung disease associated with systemic sclerosis, a year-long study has found.
In a placebo-controlled 52-week trial, forced vital capacity (FVC) in patients who took nintedanib (Ofev) declined by a mean of 52 mL – significantly less than the mean 93 mL decline seen among those who were given placebo, Oliver Distler, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American Thoracic Society.
“These are people in their mid-40s and -50s,” said Dr. Distler of the University of Zürich. “They have a long time to go. If there is an annual preservation of lung function by 40%, if you have that every year, it becomes very surely clinically significant. A decline in FVC is also a good surrogate marker of mortality in interstitial lung disease associated with systemic sclerosis. Assuming the effects are ongoing above the 1 year we looked at, then indeed these results are clinically important.”
The study was simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Nintedanib is already approved for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. But some data suggest that it also exerts antifibrotic and anti-inflammatory effects in animal models of systemic sclerosis and inflammatory lung disease (ILD). SENSCIS (the Safety and Efficacy of Nintedanib in Systemic Sclerosis trial) investigated the molecule’s use in patients with ILD associated with systemic sclerosis.
Conducted in 32 countries, SENSCIS comprised 576 patients with the disorder, whose sclerosis affected at least 10% of their lungs. They were assigned to 52 weeks of either placebo or 150 mg nintedanib twice weekly. However, patients stayed on their blinded treatment until the last patient enrolled had finished the year of treatment; some patients took the drug for 100 weeks, Dr. Distler said. The primary endpoint was annual rate of decline in the forced vital capacity (FEV). Secondary endpoints included changes of the modified Rodnan skin score and in the total score on the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire.
Patients were a mean of 54 years old, with a mean disease duration of about 3 years. About half had diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis; the sclerosis was limited in the remainder. The mean extent of lung fibrosis was about 36%. Half were taking mycophenolate at baseline, which was allowed as background treatment, along with up to 10 mg/day of prednisone. Any patient who experienced clinically significant lung function deterioration could receive additional therapy at the investigator’s discretion.
The mean baseline FEV for these patients was 72.5% of predicted value. The mean diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide was 53% of expected capacity.
Most patients completed the study (80% of the active group and 89% of the placebo group). The mean drug exposure duration was 10 months in the active group and 11 in the placebo group.
Improvement began early in treatment, with the efficacy curves separating by week 12 and continuing to diverge. After 52 weeks of therapy, the annual rate of change was 41 mL less in the active group than in the placebo group (–54.4 mL vs. –93.3 mL). The mean adjusted absolute change from baseline was –54.6 mL in the active group and –101 mL in the placebo at week 52. Significantly fewer patients taking nintedanib also lost more than 10% of FVC by week 52 (16.7% vs. 18%).
The St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score improved about one point in the active group and declined about one point in the placebo group.
Nintedanib was equally effective across a number of subgroups, including those divided by sex, age, and race. Antitopoisomerase antibodies and so-called antitopoisomerase I antibody status did not affect nintedanib’s action. Nintedanib also significantly improved scores on the Health Assessment Questionnaire without Disability Index and dyspnea.
More patients in the active group than in on placebo discontinued treatment because of a serious adverse event (16% vs. 8.7%). The most common of these were diarrhea (75.7% vs. 31%), nausea (31.6% vs. 13.5%), and vomiting (24.7% vs.10.4%). Skin ulcers occurred in about 18% of each group. Patients in the active group were significantly more likely to develop elevated alanine and aspartate aminotransferase of up to three times normal levels (4.9% vs. 0.7%).
Treatment did not significantly affect mortality rates, however. Over the treatment period, 10 patients in the nintedanib group and 9 in the placebo group died (3.5% vs. 3.1%).
The study was sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Distler was the primary investigator on the trial.
SOURCE: Distler O et al. ATS 2019, Abstract A7360.
DALLAS – Nintedanib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, decreased by 44% the annual rate of lung function decline among patients with interstitial lung disease associated with systemic sclerosis, a year-long study has found.
In a placebo-controlled 52-week trial, forced vital capacity (FVC) in patients who took nintedanib (Ofev) declined by a mean of 52 mL – significantly less than the mean 93 mL decline seen among those who were given placebo, Oliver Distler, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American Thoracic Society.
“These are people in their mid-40s and -50s,” said Dr. Distler of the University of Zürich. “They have a long time to go. If there is an annual preservation of lung function by 40%, if you have that every year, it becomes very surely clinically significant. A decline in FVC is also a good surrogate marker of mortality in interstitial lung disease associated with systemic sclerosis. Assuming the effects are ongoing above the 1 year we looked at, then indeed these results are clinically important.”
The study was simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Nintedanib is already approved for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. But some data suggest that it also exerts antifibrotic and anti-inflammatory effects in animal models of systemic sclerosis and inflammatory lung disease (ILD). SENSCIS (the Safety and Efficacy of Nintedanib in Systemic Sclerosis trial) investigated the molecule’s use in patients with ILD associated with systemic sclerosis.
Conducted in 32 countries, SENSCIS comprised 576 patients with the disorder, whose sclerosis affected at least 10% of their lungs. They were assigned to 52 weeks of either placebo or 150 mg nintedanib twice weekly. However, patients stayed on their blinded treatment until the last patient enrolled had finished the year of treatment; some patients took the drug for 100 weeks, Dr. Distler said. The primary endpoint was annual rate of decline in the forced vital capacity (FEV). Secondary endpoints included changes of the modified Rodnan skin score and in the total score on the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire.
Patients were a mean of 54 years old, with a mean disease duration of about 3 years. About half had diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis; the sclerosis was limited in the remainder. The mean extent of lung fibrosis was about 36%. Half were taking mycophenolate at baseline, which was allowed as background treatment, along with up to 10 mg/day of prednisone. Any patient who experienced clinically significant lung function deterioration could receive additional therapy at the investigator’s discretion.
The mean baseline FEV for these patients was 72.5% of predicted value. The mean diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide was 53% of expected capacity.
Most patients completed the study (80% of the active group and 89% of the placebo group). The mean drug exposure duration was 10 months in the active group and 11 in the placebo group.
Improvement began early in treatment, with the efficacy curves separating by week 12 and continuing to diverge. After 52 weeks of therapy, the annual rate of change was 41 mL less in the active group than in the placebo group (–54.4 mL vs. –93.3 mL). The mean adjusted absolute change from baseline was –54.6 mL in the active group and –101 mL in the placebo at week 52. Significantly fewer patients taking nintedanib also lost more than 10% of FVC by week 52 (16.7% vs. 18%).
The St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score improved about one point in the active group and declined about one point in the placebo group.
Nintedanib was equally effective across a number of subgroups, including those divided by sex, age, and race. Antitopoisomerase antibodies and so-called antitopoisomerase I antibody status did not affect nintedanib’s action. Nintedanib also significantly improved scores on the Health Assessment Questionnaire without Disability Index and dyspnea.
More patients in the active group than in on placebo discontinued treatment because of a serious adverse event (16% vs. 8.7%). The most common of these were diarrhea (75.7% vs. 31%), nausea (31.6% vs. 13.5%), and vomiting (24.7% vs.10.4%). Skin ulcers occurred in about 18% of each group. Patients in the active group were significantly more likely to develop elevated alanine and aspartate aminotransferase of up to three times normal levels (4.9% vs. 0.7%).
Treatment did not significantly affect mortality rates, however. Over the treatment period, 10 patients in the nintedanib group and 9 in the placebo group died (3.5% vs. 3.1%).
The study was sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Distler was the primary investigator on the trial.
SOURCE: Distler O et al. ATS 2019, Abstract A7360.
AT ATS 2019
Key clinical point: The tyrosine kinase inhibitor nintedanib may be a useful treatment for interstitial lung disease associated with systemic sclerosis (SS-ILD).
Major finding: Nintedanib decreased the annual rate of lung function decline by 44% among patients with SS-ILD.
Study details: The randomized, placebo-controlled study comprised 576 patients.
Disclosures: The trial was sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Distler is the primary investigator.
Source: Distler O et al. ATS 2019, Abstract A7360.
Significant increase in low-attenuation coronary plaques found in lupus
SAN FRANCISCO – according to an investigation from Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.
All of the 102 lupus patients in the coronary artery CT angiography study also had positive plaque remodeling, meaning that at least one low-attenuation plaque was growing into the lumen wall, not the lumen itself, which makes them difficult to detect on standard imaging. Low-attenuation plaques were defined in the study as a plaque larger than 1 mm2 with a radiodensity below 30 Hounsfield units.
Low-attenuation plaques are inherently unstable; they’re fatty, necrotic, and have a high risk of rupturing; their presence in the lumen wall is especially worrisome. In the general population, they sometimes regress, scarring down over time and no longer posing a threat. That didn’t happen in the 30 lupus patients who had follow-up CT angiographies, some 9 years after their first.
The team conducted the study to help understand why cardiovascular disease is so common in lupus, and the leading cause of death. Hopkins investigators have shown previously that statins have no effect on the risk or plaque occurrence and progression, and the cardiovascular risk doesn’t always seem to correlate with disease control. For those and other reasons, the current thinking at Hopkins is that cardiovascular disease in lupus is somehow different than in the general population, said George Stojan, MD, an assistant professor of rheumatology at the school and codirector of the Hopkins Lupus Center.
The goal is “to figure out exactly what to look for when we assess the risk; I don’t think we understand that at this point. We assume patients with lupus behave exactly like patients who don’t have lupus, but they obviously don’t. They do not respond to statins. They have a higher risk no matter what you do for them, even when their disease activity is low, and how much plaque they have over time doesn’t really correlate with disease activity,” he said at an international conference on systemic lupus erythematosus.
“Once we understand” the mechanism, “then we can try to [alter] it. Maybe we can look at new drugs, like the PCSK9 inhibitors which have shown a lot of promise in the general population.” At this point, however, “we don’t really know how to intervene,” Dr. Stojan said.
In the meantime, positive remodeling and low-attenuation, noncalcified plaques (LANCPs) might be something to look for when assessing systemic lupus erythematosus cardiovascular risk. “A simple coronary calcium score, something that all doctors do,” is not enough in lupus, nor is simply checking for lumen obstruction. Also, it’s important not to be misled by an overall reduction in noncalcified plaques. “Low-attenuation, noncalcified plaques don’t [regress] over time in lupus, and they are the ones that lead to cardiovascular events,” he said.
The CT angiography findings were compared with findings in 100 healthy controls who had two CT angiograms in a University of California, Los Angeles, cohort. Overall, there was a mean of 458 LANCPs among lupus patients, versus 42 among controls, a more than 900% difference (P less than .001).
Women with lupus aged under 44 years had a mean of 63 LANCPs; none were detected in healthy women under 44 years. Among women aged 45-59 years, there was a mean of 451 LANCPs in the lupus group versus 53 in the control arm. The findings were highly statistically significant, and almost statistically significant for women 60 years or older, 695 lesions among lupus patients versus 22 (P = .0576).
There were only nine men with lupus in the study, but the findings were similar versus male controls.
While mean LANCP volume regressed over time in the control group (mean, –6.90 mm3; P = .0002), a mean regression of –13.56 mm3 in the lupus group was not statistically significant (P = .4570).
Both controls and lupus patients had a positive remodeling index. It progressed in the lupus group over time, and regressed in controls, but the findings were not statistically significant.
“Statins did nothing for the lupus patients. They didn’t affect progress of coronary plaques at all. We still treat patients because theoretically we don’t have anything better, but we know that they don’t really work in this population,” Dr. Stojan said
The work is funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Stojan didn’t report any relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Stojan G et al. Lupus Sci Med. 2019;6[suppl 1]:A200, Abstract 274.
SAN FRANCISCO – according to an investigation from Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.
All of the 102 lupus patients in the coronary artery CT angiography study also had positive plaque remodeling, meaning that at least one low-attenuation plaque was growing into the lumen wall, not the lumen itself, which makes them difficult to detect on standard imaging. Low-attenuation plaques were defined in the study as a plaque larger than 1 mm2 with a radiodensity below 30 Hounsfield units.
Low-attenuation plaques are inherently unstable; they’re fatty, necrotic, and have a high risk of rupturing; their presence in the lumen wall is especially worrisome. In the general population, they sometimes regress, scarring down over time and no longer posing a threat. That didn’t happen in the 30 lupus patients who had follow-up CT angiographies, some 9 years after their first.
The team conducted the study to help understand why cardiovascular disease is so common in lupus, and the leading cause of death. Hopkins investigators have shown previously that statins have no effect on the risk or plaque occurrence and progression, and the cardiovascular risk doesn’t always seem to correlate with disease control. For those and other reasons, the current thinking at Hopkins is that cardiovascular disease in lupus is somehow different than in the general population, said George Stojan, MD, an assistant professor of rheumatology at the school and codirector of the Hopkins Lupus Center.
The goal is “to figure out exactly what to look for when we assess the risk; I don’t think we understand that at this point. We assume patients with lupus behave exactly like patients who don’t have lupus, but they obviously don’t. They do not respond to statins. They have a higher risk no matter what you do for them, even when their disease activity is low, and how much plaque they have over time doesn’t really correlate with disease activity,” he said at an international conference on systemic lupus erythematosus.
“Once we understand” the mechanism, “then we can try to [alter] it. Maybe we can look at new drugs, like the PCSK9 inhibitors which have shown a lot of promise in the general population.” At this point, however, “we don’t really know how to intervene,” Dr. Stojan said.
In the meantime, positive remodeling and low-attenuation, noncalcified plaques (LANCPs) might be something to look for when assessing systemic lupus erythematosus cardiovascular risk. “A simple coronary calcium score, something that all doctors do,” is not enough in lupus, nor is simply checking for lumen obstruction. Also, it’s important not to be misled by an overall reduction in noncalcified plaques. “Low-attenuation, noncalcified plaques don’t [regress] over time in lupus, and they are the ones that lead to cardiovascular events,” he said.
The CT angiography findings were compared with findings in 100 healthy controls who had two CT angiograms in a University of California, Los Angeles, cohort. Overall, there was a mean of 458 LANCPs among lupus patients, versus 42 among controls, a more than 900% difference (P less than .001).
Women with lupus aged under 44 years had a mean of 63 LANCPs; none were detected in healthy women under 44 years. Among women aged 45-59 years, there was a mean of 451 LANCPs in the lupus group versus 53 in the control arm. The findings were highly statistically significant, and almost statistically significant for women 60 years or older, 695 lesions among lupus patients versus 22 (P = .0576).
There were only nine men with lupus in the study, but the findings were similar versus male controls.
While mean LANCP volume regressed over time in the control group (mean, –6.90 mm3; P = .0002), a mean regression of –13.56 mm3 in the lupus group was not statistically significant (P = .4570).
Both controls and lupus patients had a positive remodeling index. It progressed in the lupus group over time, and regressed in controls, but the findings were not statistically significant.
“Statins did nothing for the lupus patients. They didn’t affect progress of coronary plaques at all. We still treat patients because theoretically we don’t have anything better, but we know that they don’t really work in this population,” Dr. Stojan said
The work is funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Stojan didn’t report any relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Stojan G et al. Lupus Sci Med. 2019;6[suppl 1]:A200, Abstract 274.
SAN FRANCISCO – according to an investigation from Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.
All of the 102 lupus patients in the coronary artery CT angiography study also had positive plaque remodeling, meaning that at least one low-attenuation plaque was growing into the lumen wall, not the lumen itself, which makes them difficult to detect on standard imaging. Low-attenuation plaques were defined in the study as a plaque larger than 1 mm2 with a radiodensity below 30 Hounsfield units.
Low-attenuation plaques are inherently unstable; they’re fatty, necrotic, and have a high risk of rupturing; their presence in the lumen wall is especially worrisome. In the general population, they sometimes regress, scarring down over time and no longer posing a threat. That didn’t happen in the 30 lupus patients who had follow-up CT angiographies, some 9 years after their first.
The team conducted the study to help understand why cardiovascular disease is so common in lupus, and the leading cause of death. Hopkins investigators have shown previously that statins have no effect on the risk or plaque occurrence and progression, and the cardiovascular risk doesn’t always seem to correlate with disease control. For those and other reasons, the current thinking at Hopkins is that cardiovascular disease in lupus is somehow different than in the general population, said George Stojan, MD, an assistant professor of rheumatology at the school and codirector of the Hopkins Lupus Center.
The goal is “to figure out exactly what to look for when we assess the risk; I don’t think we understand that at this point. We assume patients with lupus behave exactly like patients who don’t have lupus, but they obviously don’t. They do not respond to statins. They have a higher risk no matter what you do for them, even when their disease activity is low, and how much plaque they have over time doesn’t really correlate with disease activity,” he said at an international conference on systemic lupus erythematosus.
“Once we understand” the mechanism, “then we can try to [alter] it. Maybe we can look at new drugs, like the PCSK9 inhibitors which have shown a lot of promise in the general population.” At this point, however, “we don’t really know how to intervene,” Dr. Stojan said.
In the meantime, positive remodeling and low-attenuation, noncalcified plaques (LANCPs) might be something to look for when assessing systemic lupus erythematosus cardiovascular risk. “A simple coronary calcium score, something that all doctors do,” is not enough in lupus, nor is simply checking for lumen obstruction. Also, it’s important not to be misled by an overall reduction in noncalcified plaques. “Low-attenuation, noncalcified plaques don’t [regress] over time in lupus, and they are the ones that lead to cardiovascular events,” he said.
The CT angiography findings were compared with findings in 100 healthy controls who had two CT angiograms in a University of California, Los Angeles, cohort. Overall, there was a mean of 458 LANCPs among lupus patients, versus 42 among controls, a more than 900% difference (P less than .001).
Women with lupus aged under 44 years had a mean of 63 LANCPs; none were detected in healthy women under 44 years. Among women aged 45-59 years, there was a mean of 451 LANCPs in the lupus group versus 53 in the control arm. The findings were highly statistically significant, and almost statistically significant for women 60 years or older, 695 lesions among lupus patients versus 22 (P = .0576).
There were only nine men with lupus in the study, but the findings were similar versus male controls.
While mean LANCP volume regressed over time in the control group (mean, –6.90 mm3; P = .0002), a mean regression of –13.56 mm3 in the lupus group was not statistically significant (P = .4570).
Both controls and lupus patients had a positive remodeling index. It progressed in the lupus group over time, and regressed in controls, but the findings were not statistically significant.
“Statins did nothing for the lupus patients. They didn’t affect progress of coronary plaques at all. We still treat patients because theoretically we don’t have anything better, but we know that they don’t really work in this population,” Dr. Stojan said
The work is funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Stojan didn’t report any relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Stojan G et al. Lupus Sci Med. 2019;6[suppl 1]:A200, Abstract 274.
REPORTING FROM LUPUS 2019
Key clinical point: Positive remodeling and low-attenuation, noncalcified plaques might be something to look for when assessing systemic lupus erythematosus cardiovascular risk.
Major finding: There was a mean of 458 low-attenuation, noncalcified plaques among lupus patients versus 42 among controls, a more than 900% difference (P less than .001)
Study details: Coronary CT angiography in 102 lupus patients and 100 healthy controls
Disclosures: The National Institutes of Health funded the work. The lead investigator didn’t report any relevant disclosures.
Source: Stojan G et al. Lupus Sci Med. 2019;6[suppl 1]:A200, Abstract 274.
Walk-in ultrasound helps to avoid unnecessary steroids for giant cell arteritis
BIRMINGHAM, England – More than half of all patients referred to a fast-track giant cell arteritis (GCA) clinic that offers a walk-in ultrasonography service avoided use of glucocorticoids, according to a report given at the annual conference of the British Society for Rheumatology.
The clinic, an initiative run by the University Hospital Coventry and Warwickshire (UHCW) NHS Trust for the past 6 years, provides same-day diagnosis and treatment for suspected GCA.
“Walk-in ultrasound helps to avoid steroids completely in a significant proportion of patients,” said study author and presenter Shirish Dubey, MBBS, a consultant rheumatologist at the UHCW NHS Trust. Of 652 patients seen at the UHCW GCA fast-track clinic between 2014 and 2017, 143 (22%) were diagnosed with GCA. Over 400 had not been exposed to glucocorticoids and 369 (57%) were able to avoid unnecessary glucocorticoid use in the cohort, Dr. Dubey reported.
The old NHS paradigm for managing patients with suspected GCA was that when they presented to their primary care physicians, they would be started on immediate glucocorticoid therapy while waiting for an urgent specialist referral. However, that referral could take anywhere from a couple of days to a couple of weeks to happen, Dr. Dubey explained. Patients would then undergo possible temporal artery biopsy (TAB) and only then, following confirmation of a GCA diagnosis, would a management plan be agreed upon.
UCHW introduced its fast-track pathway for the diagnosis of GCA in mid-2013. The pathway called for patients with suspected GCA aged 50 years or older who had two or more features present, such as an abrupt, new-onset headache or facial pain, scalp pain and tenderness, jaw claudication, or visual symptoms. Primary care physicians could make urgent referrals to the service via an on-call rheumatology trainee or ophthalmology senior house officer.
“Patients are normally steroid-naive and seen on the same day,” Dr. Dubey said. Doppler ultrasound of the temporal artery results in around 80% of diagnoses, with TAB still needed in some cases.
One of the downsides of the fast-track process perhaps is the increasing number of referrals. “One thing we find is that we have become a glorified headache service,” Dr. Dubey said. However, many patients do not have GCA and, when there is a low clinical probability and the ultrasound is negative, the patient is usually reassured and discharged with no need for glucocorticoids. Although the number of referrals have increased – 98 patients in 2014, 154 in 2015, 123 in 2016, and 277 in 2017 – the number of those diagnosed with GCA has remained around the same.
To see how ultrasound was faring in real-life practice, the UHCW NHS Trust team compared Doppler ultrasound findings against the final clinical diagnosis for the period 2014 to 2017. A sensitivity of just under 48% and specificity of 98% was recorded. The positive and negative predictive values were 87% and 88%, respectively.
The specificity of ultrasound was lower than that reported previously in the literature, the UHCW NHS Trust team pointed out in its abstract, but it does compare similarly with other real-world studies. The use of glucocorticoids affected the ultrasound results, with better sensitivity (55%) when these drugs were not used prior to the scan.
The use of TAB versus a clinical diagnosis in 100 patients seen over the same time period showed it had a sensitivity of 37% and a specificity of 100%, with positive and negative predictive values of 100% and 62%. The sensitivity of TAB is again low, Dr. Dubey said, but that could be because TAB is performed only when the diagnosis is uncertain.
This was an unselected cohort of patients, but overall there were good positive and negative predictive values. The UHCW NHS Trust team suggested that ultrasound can assist and reassure clinicians trying to diagnose or exclude GCA in their patients.
Regular multidisciplinary team meetings including rheumatology, ophthalmology, and vascular Doppler physiologists are key to the fast-track service, Dr. Dubey pointed out.
Despite the shortcomings of the retrospective study, Dr. Dubey stressed that the team was confident that none of the patients who had been ruled out as having GCA were subsequently diagnosed as having GCA.
Importantly, he said, the use of ultrasound had made a big difference in cost; the group plans to formally evaluate costs of ultrasound versus TAB.
The study received no commercial funding. Dr. Dubey had no conflicts of interest to disclose.
SOURCE: Pinnell J et al. Rheumatology. 2019;58(suppl 3):Abstract 038.
BIRMINGHAM, England – More than half of all patients referred to a fast-track giant cell arteritis (GCA) clinic that offers a walk-in ultrasonography service avoided use of glucocorticoids, according to a report given at the annual conference of the British Society for Rheumatology.
The clinic, an initiative run by the University Hospital Coventry and Warwickshire (UHCW) NHS Trust for the past 6 years, provides same-day diagnosis and treatment for suspected GCA.
“Walk-in ultrasound helps to avoid steroids completely in a significant proportion of patients,” said study author and presenter Shirish Dubey, MBBS, a consultant rheumatologist at the UHCW NHS Trust. Of 652 patients seen at the UHCW GCA fast-track clinic between 2014 and 2017, 143 (22%) were diagnosed with GCA. Over 400 had not been exposed to glucocorticoids and 369 (57%) were able to avoid unnecessary glucocorticoid use in the cohort, Dr. Dubey reported.
The old NHS paradigm for managing patients with suspected GCA was that when they presented to their primary care physicians, they would be started on immediate glucocorticoid therapy while waiting for an urgent specialist referral. However, that referral could take anywhere from a couple of days to a couple of weeks to happen, Dr. Dubey explained. Patients would then undergo possible temporal artery biopsy (TAB) and only then, following confirmation of a GCA diagnosis, would a management plan be agreed upon.
UCHW introduced its fast-track pathway for the diagnosis of GCA in mid-2013. The pathway called for patients with suspected GCA aged 50 years or older who had two or more features present, such as an abrupt, new-onset headache or facial pain, scalp pain and tenderness, jaw claudication, or visual symptoms. Primary care physicians could make urgent referrals to the service via an on-call rheumatology trainee or ophthalmology senior house officer.
“Patients are normally steroid-naive and seen on the same day,” Dr. Dubey said. Doppler ultrasound of the temporal artery results in around 80% of diagnoses, with TAB still needed in some cases.
One of the downsides of the fast-track process perhaps is the increasing number of referrals. “One thing we find is that we have become a glorified headache service,” Dr. Dubey said. However, many patients do not have GCA and, when there is a low clinical probability and the ultrasound is negative, the patient is usually reassured and discharged with no need for glucocorticoids. Although the number of referrals have increased – 98 patients in 2014, 154 in 2015, 123 in 2016, and 277 in 2017 – the number of those diagnosed with GCA has remained around the same.
To see how ultrasound was faring in real-life practice, the UHCW NHS Trust team compared Doppler ultrasound findings against the final clinical diagnosis for the period 2014 to 2017. A sensitivity of just under 48% and specificity of 98% was recorded. The positive and negative predictive values were 87% and 88%, respectively.
The specificity of ultrasound was lower than that reported previously in the literature, the UHCW NHS Trust team pointed out in its abstract, but it does compare similarly with other real-world studies. The use of glucocorticoids affected the ultrasound results, with better sensitivity (55%) when these drugs were not used prior to the scan.
The use of TAB versus a clinical diagnosis in 100 patients seen over the same time period showed it had a sensitivity of 37% and a specificity of 100%, with positive and negative predictive values of 100% and 62%. The sensitivity of TAB is again low, Dr. Dubey said, but that could be because TAB is performed only when the diagnosis is uncertain.
This was an unselected cohort of patients, but overall there were good positive and negative predictive values. The UHCW NHS Trust team suggested that ultrasound can assist and reassure clinicians trying to diagnose or exclude GCA in their patients.
Regular multidisciplinary team meetings including rheumatology, ophthalmology, and vascular Doppler physiologists are key to the fast-track service, Dr. Dubey pointed out.
Despite the shortcomings of the retrospective study, Dr. Dubey stressed that the team was confident that none of the patients who had been ruled out as having GCA were subsequently diagnosed as having GCA.
Importantly, he said, the use of ultrasound had made a big difference in cost; the group plans to formally evaluate costs of ultrasound versus TAB.
The study received no commercial funding. Dr. Dubey had no conflicts of interest to disclose.
SOURCE: Pinnell J et al. Rheumatology. 2019;58(suppl 3):Abstract 038.
BIRMINGHAM, England – More than half of all patients referred to a fast-track giant cell arteritis (GCA) clinic that offers a walk-in ultrasonography service avoided use of glucocorticoids, according to a report given at the annual conference of the British Society for Rheumatology.
The clinic, an initiative run by the University Hospital Coventry and Warwickshire (UHCW) NHS Trust for the past 6 years, provides same-day diagnosis and treatment for suspected GCA.
“Walk-in ultrasound helps to avoid steroids completely in a significant proportion of patients,” said study author and presenter Shirish Dubey, MBBS, a consultant rheumatologist at the UHCW NHS Trust. Of 652 patients seen at the UHCW GCA fast-track clinic between 2014 and 2017, 143 (22%) were diagnosed with GCA. Over 400 had not been exposed to glucocorticoids and 369 (57%) were able to avoid unnecessary glucocorticoid use in the cohort, Dr. Dubey reported.
The old NHS paradigm for managing patients with suspected GCA was that when they presented to their primary care physicians, they would be started on immediate glucocorticoid therapy while waiting for an urgent specialist referral. However, that referral could take anywhere from a couple of days to a couple of weeks to happen, Dr. Dubey explained. Patients would then undergo possible temporal artery biopsy (TAB) and only then, following confirmation of a GCA diagnosis, would a management plan be agreed upon.
UCHW introduced its fast-track pathway for the diagnosis of GCA in mid-2013. The pathway called for patients with suspected GCA aged 50 years or older who had two or more features present, such as an abrupt, new-onset headache or facial pain, scalp pain and tenderness, jaw claudication, or visual symptoms. Primary care physicians could make urgent referrals to the service via an on-call rheumatology trainee or ophthalmology senior house officer.
“Patients are normally steroid-naive and seen on the same day,” Dr. Dubey said. Doppler ultrasound of the temporal artery results in around 80% of diagnoses, with TAB still needed in some cases.
One of the downsides of the fast-track process perhaps is the increasing number of referrals. “One thing we find is that we have become a glorified headache service,” Dr. Dubey said. However, many patients do not have GCA and, when there is a low clinical probability and the ultrasound is negative, the patient is usually reassured and discharged with no need for glucocorticoids. Although the number of referrals have increased – 98 patients in 2014, 154 in 2015, 123 in 2016, and 277 in 2017 – the number of those diagnosed with GCA has remained around the same.
To see how ultrasound was faring in real-life practice, the UHCW NHS Trust team compared Doppler ultrasound findings against the final clinical diagnosis for the period 2014 to 2017. A sensitivity of just under 48% and specificity of 98% was recorded. The positive and negative predictive values were 87% and 88%, respectively.
The specificity of ultrasound was lower than that reported previously in the literature, the UHCW NHS Trust team pointed out in its abstract, but it does compare similarly with other real-world studies. The use of glucocorticoids affected the ultrasound results, with better sensitivity (55%) when these drugs were not used prior to the scan.
The use of TAB versus a clinical diagnosis in 100 patients seen over the same time period showed it had a sensitivity of 37% and a specificity of 100%, with positive and negative predictive values of 100% and 62%. The sensitivity of TAB is again low, Dr. Dubey said, but that could be because TAB is performed only when the diagnosis is uncertain.
This was an unselected cohort of patients, but overall there were good positive and negative predictive values. The UHCW NHS Trust team suggested that ultrasound can assist and reassure clinicians trying to diagnose or exclude GCA in their patients.
Regular multidisciplinary team meetings including rheumatology, ophthalmology, and vascular Doppler physiologists are key to the fast-track service, Dr. Dubey pointed out.
Despite the shortcomings of the retrospective study, Dr. Dubey stressed that the team was confident that none of the patients who had been ruled out as having GCA were subsequently diagnosed as having GCA.
Importantly, he said, the use of ultrasound had made a big difference in cost; the group plans to formally evaluate costs of ultrasound versus TAB.
The study received no commercial funding. Dr. Dubey had no conflicts of interest to disclose.
SOURCE: Pinnell J et al. Rheumatology. 2019;58(suppl 3):Abstract 038.
REPORTING FROM BSR 2019
Intradermal etanercept improves discoid lupus
BIRMINGHAM, ENGLAND – Intradermal delivery of a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) could offer patients with discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) a much-needed additional treatment option, according to results of a phase 2, “proof-of-concept” study.
Overall, 14 (56%) of the 25 patients in the study achieved a 20% or greater reduction in disease activity from baseline to week 12 via intradermal injection of etanercept (Enbrel), which was assessed via the modified limited Score of Activity and Damage in DLE (ML-SADDLE). About half (48%) and one-fifth (20%) also achieved greater reductions of 50% and 70%, respectively.
“Discoid lupus is a chronic form of cutaneous lupus. Usually it occurs in visible areas like the face and scalp, causing scarring, so it’s really disabling and affects patients’ quality of life,” observed the lead study investigator Md Yuzaiful Md Yusof, MBChB, PhD, NIHR Academic Clinical Lecturer at the University of Leeds, England.
“It’s also one of the most resistant manifestations of lupus,” he said during a poster presentation at the annual conference of the British Society for Rheumatology. “Usually, when people have discoid lupus, the dermatologist gives antimalarial treatment, but only 50% of people respond to these drugs. So, what happens to the rest of them?” Basically, it is trial and error, Dr. Md Yusof said; some patients may be given disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and in some patients this may work well, but in others there may be toxicity that contraindicates treatment.
B-cell therapy with rituximab (Rituxan) has not been successful, he said. In a previous study of 35 patients with refractory discoid lupus, none of the patients responded to rituximab and half of them actually flared after taking the drug.
There is a pathologic case for using anti-TNF therapy in DLE, but the use of TNFis is not without concern. Such treatment can increase antinuclear antibody production and make lupus worse. “In order to overcome this, as the lesion is quite small, we don’t need to use a systemic approach,” Dr. Md Yusof explained in an interview. “If you give directly, it should just be confined to the lesion and not absorbed, that’s the whole idea of thinking outside the box.” He noted that if it worked, such treatment would be for inducing remission and not for maintenance.
The study, “Targeted therapy using intradermal injection of etanercept for remission induction in discoid lupus erythematosus” (TARGET-DLE) was designed to test the validity of using intradermal rather than subcutaneous TNFi therapy in patients with discoid lupus.
Dr. Md Yusof noted that only 25 patients needed to be recruited into the single-arm, prospective trial as a “Simon’s two-stage minimized design” was used (Control Clin Trials. 1989;10[1]:1-10). This involved treating the first few patients to see if a response occurred and if it did, carrying on with treating the others, but if no response occurred in at least two patients, the trial would stop completely.
Adult patients were eligible for inclusion if they had one or more active DLE lesions and had not responded to antimalarial treatment. Stable doses of DMARDs and up to 10 mg of oral prednisolone daily was permitted if already being taken prior to entering the study.
Etanercept was injected intradermally around the most symptomatic lesion once a week for up to 12 weeks. The dosage was determined based on the radius of the selected discoid lesion. Over an 18-month period, all 25 patients were recruited, including 18 women. The median age of patients was 47 years, and six had systemic lupus erythematosus. The median number of prior DMARDs was 5 but ranged from 1 to 16, indicating a very resistant patient population.
The primary endpoint was at least 6 of the 25 patients having at least a 20% reduction in ML-SADDLE at week 12; 14 (56%) patients achieved this.
“We didn’t use CLASI [Cutaneous Lupus Area and Severity Index Activity Score] because that only includes erythema and atrophy,” Dr. Md Yusof explained. “In discoid lupus, induration is quite important as well, so that’s why we used ML-SADDLE. We called it ‘modified limited’ because the original SADDLE score is based on the whole organ score, but we only calculated the one lesion that we wanted to treat.”
In addition to meeting the primary endpoint, several secondary endpoints were met, including significant improvements in scores on visual analog scales as determined by pre- and posttreatment scoring by physicians (53.1 mm vs. 23.2 mm; P less than .001) and patients (56.9 mm vs. 29.7 mm; P = .001). Mean Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score significantly improved between pre- and post treatment, as did blood perfusion under the skin based on laser Doppler imaging and infrared thermography. However, no difference was seen with optical coherence tomography.
“There were only four grade 3/4 toxicities, and importantly, none of the SLE patients got worse, and none with DLE only converted into SLE,” Dr. Md Yusof reported. Of the four grade 3/4 adverse events, two were chest infections, one was heart failure, and one was a worsening of chilblains.
“It was a full-powered phase 2 trial, and because it was positive, now we can go to phase 3 trial,” he added.
Before conducting a phase 3 trial, however, Dr. Md Yusof wants to refine how the TNFi is delivered. Perhaps an intradermal patch with microneedles could be used. This would be left on the skin for a short amount of time to allow drug delivery and then removed. It could help ensure that all patients comply with treatment and perhaps even self-administer, he noted.
“The median compliance rate was 80%, which is not too bad, but I think when we come to run a phase 3 trial, I’m looking to improve the drug delivery,” he said. Changing the delivery method will need to be validated before a phase 3 trial can be started.
The study was not commercially funded. Dr. Md Yusof had no disclosures. Pfizer provided the study drug free of charge.
SOURCE: Md Yusof MY et al. Rheumatology. 2019;58(suppl 3): Abstract 244. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kez107.060.
BIRMINGHAM, ENGLAND – Intradermal delivery of a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) could offer patients with discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) a much-needed additional treatment option, according to results of a phase 2, “proof-of-concept” study.
Overall, 14 (56%) of the 25 patients in the study achieved a 20% or greater reduction in disease activity from baseline to week 12 via intradermal injection of etanercept (Enbrel), which was assessed via the modified limited Score of Activity and Damage in DLE (ML-SADDLE). About half (48%) and one-fifth (20%) also achieved greater reductions of 50% and 70%, respectively.
“Discoid lupus is a chronic form of cutaneous lupus. Usually it occurs in visible areas like the face and scalp, causing scarring, so it’s really disabling and affects patients’ quality of life,” observed the lead study investigator Md Yuzaiful Md Yusof, MBChB, PhD, NIHR Academic Clinical Lecturer at the University of Leeds, England.
“It’s also one of the most resistant manifestations of lupus,” he said during a poster presentation at the annual conference of the British Society for Rheumatology. “Usually, when people have discoid lupus, the dermatologist gives antimalarial treatment, but only 50% of people respond to these drugs. So, what happens to the rest of them?” Basically, it is trial and error, Dr. Md Yusof said; some patients may be given disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and in some patients this may work well, but in others there may be toxicity that contraindicates treatment.
B-cell therapy with rituximab (Rituxan) has not been successful, he said. In a previous study of 35 patients with refractory discoid lupus, none of the patients responded to rituximab and half of them actually flared after taking the drug.
There is a pathologic case for using anti-TNF therapy in DLE, but the use of TNFis is not without concern. Such treatment can increase antinuclear antibody production and make lupus worse. “In order to overcome this, as the lesion is quite small, we don’t need to use a systemic approach,” Dr. Md Yusof explained in an interview. “If you give directly, it should just be confined to the lesion and not absorbed, that’s the whole idea of thinking outside the box.” He noted that if it worked, such treatment would be for inducing remission and not for maintenance.
The study, “Targeted therapy using intradermal injection of etanercept for remission induction in discoid lupus erythematosus” (TARGET-DLE) was designed to test the validity of using intradermal rather than subcutaneous TNFi therapy in patients with discoid lupus.
Dr. Md Yusof noted that only 25 patients needed to be recruited into the single-arm, prospective trial as a “Simon’s two-stage minimized design” was used (Control Clin Trials. 1989;10[1]:1-10). This involved treating the first few patients to see if a response occurred and if it did, carrying on with treating the others, but if no response occurred in at least two patients, the trial would stop completely.
Adult patients were eligible for inclusion if they had one or more active DLE lesions and had not responded to antimalarial treatment. Stable doses of DMARDs and up to 10 mg of oral prednisolone daily was permitted if already being taken prior to entering the study.
Etanercept was injected intradermally around the most symptomatic lesion once a week for up to 12 weeks. The dosage was determined based on the radius of the selected discoid lesion. Over an 18-month period, all 25 patients were recruited, including 18 women. The median age of patients was 47 years, and six had systemic lupus erythematosus. The median number of prior DMARDs was 5 but ranged from 1 to 16, indicating a very resistant patient population.
The primary endpoint was at least 6 of the 25 patients having at least a 20% reduction in ML-SADDLE at week 12; 14 (56%) patients achieved this.
“We didn’t use CLASI [Cutaneous Lupus Area and Severity Index Activity Score] because that only includes erythema and atrophy,” Dr. Md Yusof explained. “In discoid lupus, induration is quite important as well, so that’s why we used ML-SADDLE. We called it ‘modified limited’ because the original SADDLE score is based on the whole organ score, but we only calculated the one lesion that we wanted to treat.”
In addition to meeting the primary endpoint, several secondary endpoints were met, including significant improvements in scores on visual analog scales as determined by pre- and posttreatment scoring by physicians (53.1 mm vs. 23.2 mm; P less than .001) and patients (56.9 mm vs. 29.7 mm; P = .001). Mean Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score significantly improved between pre- and post treatment, as did blood perfusion under the skin based on laser Doppler imaging and infrared thermography. However, no difference was seen with optical coherence tomography.
“There were only four grade 3/4 toxicities, and importantly, none of the SLE patients got worse, and none with DLE only converted into SLE,” Dr. Md Yusof reported. Of the four grade 3/4 adverse events, two were chest infections, one was heart failure, and one was a worsening of chilblains.
“It was a full-powered phase 2 trial, and because it was positive, now we can go to phase 3 trial,” he added.
Before conducting a phase 3 trial, however, Dr. Md Yusof wants to refine how the TNFi is delivered. Perhaps an intradermal patch with microneedles could be used. This would be left on the skin for a short amount of time to allow drug delivery and then removed. It could help ensure that all patients comply with treatment and perhaps even self-administer, he noted.
“The median compliance rate was 80%, which is not too bad, but I think when we come to run a phase 3 trial, I’m looking to improve the drug delivery,” he said. Changing the delivery method will need to be validated before a phase 3 trial can be started.
The study was not commercially funded. Dr. Md Yusof had no disclosures. Pfizer provided the study drug free of charge.
SOURCE: Md Yusof MY et al. Rheumatology. 2019;58(suppl 3): Abstract 244. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kez107.060.
BIRMINGHAM, ENGLAND – Intradermal delivery of a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) could offer patients with discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) a much-needed additional treatment option, according to results of a phase 2, “proof-of-concept” study.
Overall, 14 (56%) of the 25 patients in the study achieved a 20% or greater reduction in disease activity from baseline to week 12 via intradermal injection of etanercept (Enbrel), which was assessed via the modified limited Score of Activity and Damage in DLE (ML-SADDLE). About half (48%) and one-fifth (20%) also achieved greater reductions of 50% and 70%, respectively.
“Discoid lupus is a chronic form of cutaneous lupus. Usually it occurs in visible areas like the face and scalp, causing scarring, so it’s really disabling and affects patients’ quality of life,” observed the lead study investigator Md Yuzaiful Md Yusof, MBChB, PhD, NIHR Academic Clinical Lecturer at the University of Leeds, England.
“It’s also one of the most resistant manifestations of lupus,” he said during a poster presentation at the annual conference of the British Society for Rheumatology. “Usually, when people have discoid lupus, the dermatologist gives antimalarial treatment, but only 50% of people respond to these drugs. So, what happens to the rest of them?” Basically, it is trial and error, Dr. Md Yusof said; some patients may be given disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and in some patients this may work well, but in others there may be toxicity that contraindicates treatment.
B-cell therapy with rituximab (Rituxan) has not been successful, he said. In a previous study of 35 patients with refractory discoid lupus, none of the patients responded to rituximab and half of them actually flared after taking the drug.
There is a pathologic case for using anti-TNF therapy in DLE, but the use of TNFis is not without concern. Such treatment can increase antinuclear antibody production and make lupus worse. “In order to overcome this, as the lesion is quite small, we don’t need to use a systemic approach,” Dr. Md Yusof explained in an interview. “If you give directly, it should just be confined to the lesion and not absorbed, that’s the whole idea of thinking outside the box.” He noted that if it worked, such treatment would be for inducing remission and not for maintenance.
The study, “Targeted therapy using intradermal injection of etanercept for remission induction in discoid lupus erythematosus” (TARGET-DLE) was designed to test the validity of using intradermal rather than subcutaneous TNFi therapy in patients with discoid lupus.
Dr. Md Yusof noted that only 25 patients needed to be recruited into the single-arm, prospective trial as a “Simon’s two-stage minimized design” was used (Control Clin Trials. 1989;10[1]:1-10). This involved treating the first few patients to see if a response occurred and if it did, carrying on with treating the others, but if no response occurred in at least two patients, the trial would stop completely.
Adult patients were eligible for inclusion if they had one or more active DLE lesions and had not responded to antimalarial treatment. Stable doses of DMARDs and up to 10 mg of oral prednisolone daily was permitted if already being taken prior to entering the study.
Etanercept was injected intradermally around the most symptomatic lesion once a week for up to 12 weeks. The dosage was determined based on the radius of the selected discoid lesion. Over an 18-month period, all 25 patients were recruited, including 18 women. The median age of patients was 47 years, and six had systemic lupus erythematosus. The median number of prior DMARDs was 5 but ranged from 1 to 16, indicating a very resistant patient population.
The primary endpoint was at least 6 of the 25 patients having at least a 20% reduction in ML-SADDLE at week 12; 14 (56%) patients achieved this.
“We didn’t use CLASI [Cutaneous Lupus Area and Severity Index Activity Score] because that only includes erythema and atrophy,” Dr. Md Yusof explained. “In discoid lupus, induration is quite important as well, so that’s why we used ML-SADDLE. We called it ‘modified limited’ because the original SADDLE score is based on the whole organ score, but we only calculated the one lesion that we wanted to treat.”
In addition to meeting the primary endpoint, several secondary endpoints were met, including significant improvements in scores on visual analog scales as determined by pre- and posttreatment scoring by physicians (53.1 mm vs. 23.2 mm; P less than .001) and patients (56.9 mm vs. 29.7 mm; P = .001). Mean Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score significantly improved between pre- and post treatment, as did blood perfusion under the skin based on laser Doppler imaging and infrared thermography. However, no difference was seen with optical coherence tomography.
“There were only four grade 3/4 toxicities, and importantly, none of the SLE patients got worse, and none with DLE only converted into SLE,” Dr. Md Yusof reported. Of the four grade 3/4 adverse events, two were chest infections, one was heart failure, and one was a worsening of chilblains.
“It was a full-powered phase 2 trial, and because it was positive, now we can go to phase 3 trial,” he added.
Before conducting a phase 3 trial, however, Dr. Md Yusof wants to refine how the TNFi is delivered. Perhaps an intradermal patch with microneedles could be used. This would be left on the skin for a short amount of time to allow drug delivery and then removed. It could help ensure that all patients comply with treatment and perhaps even self-administer, he noted.
“The median compliance rate was 80%, which is not too bad, but I think when we come to run a phase 3 trial, I’m looking to improve the drug delivery,” he said. Changing the delivery method will need to be validated before a phase 3 trial can be started.
The study was not commercially funded. Dr. Md Yusof had no disclosures. Pfizer provided the study drug free of charge.
SOURCE: Md Yusof MY et al. Rheumatology. 2019;58(suppl 3): Abstract 244. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kez107.060.
REPORTING FROM BSR 2019
Arthritis joint pain, inactivity vary greatly across U.S.
Almost 31% of the estimated 54 million adults in the United States with arthritis have severe joint pain, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Nationally, the prevalence of severe joint pain was 30.8% in adults with arthritis in 2017, but state-specific, age-standardized prevalences varied from a low of 20.8% in Colorado to 45.2% in Mississippi. Regionally, prevalences of both severe joint pain and physical inactivity in arthritis patients were highest in the Southeast, noted Dana Guglielmo, MPH, of the CDC’s National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Atlanta, and associates (MMWR 2019 May 3;68(17):381-7).
The prevalence of arthritis itself was lowest in the District of Columbia at 15.7% and highest in West Virginia at 34.6%. Alabama, at 30.4%, was the only other state above 30%. Colorado had the lowest physical inactivity rate (23.2%), while Kentucky had the highest (44.4%), the investigators said.
The differences among arthritis patients were demographic as well as geographic in 2017. The prevalence of severe joint pain was 33.0% among those aged 18-44 years and 35.6% in those 45-64 but only 25.1% in those aged 65 and older. Whites had a 27.4% prevalence of severe joint pain, compared with 42.0% for Hispanics and 50.9% for blacks. For arthritis patients with a college degree, the age-standardized prevalence of severe joint pain was 15.1%, compared with 35.5% for high school graduates and 54.1% for those with less than a high school degree, based on data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.
“Although persons with arthritis report that pain, or fear of causing or worsening it, is a substantial barrier to exercising, physical activity is an inexpensive intervention that can reduce pain, prevent or delay disability and limitations, and improve mental health, physical functioning, and quality of life with few adverse effects,” wrote Ms. Guglielmo and associates. Adults with severe joint pain “should engage in regular physical activity according to their abilities and avoid physical inactivity [since] even small amounts of physical activity can improve physical functioning in adults with joint conditions.”
SOURCE: Guglielmo D et al. MMWR 2019 May 3;68(17):381-7.
Almost 31% of the estimated 54 million adults in the United States with arthritis have severe joint pain, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Nationally, the prevalence of severe joint pain was 30.8% in adults with arthritis in 2017, but state-specific, age-standardized prevalences varied from a low of 20.8% in Colorado to 45.2% in Mississippi. Regionally, prevalences of both severe joint pain and physical inactivity in arthritis patients were highest in the Southeast, noted Dana Guglielmo, MPH, of the CDC’s National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Atlanta, and associates (MMWR 2019 May 3;68(17):381-7).
The prevalence of arthritis itself was lowest in the District of Columbia at 15.7% and highest in West Virginia at 34.6%. Alabama, at 30.4%, was the only other state above 30%. Colorado had the lowest physical inactivity rate (23.2%), while Kentucky had the highest (44.4%), the investigators said.
The differences among arthritis patients were demographic as well as geographic in 2017. The prevalence of severe joint pain was 33.0% among those aged 18-44 years and 35.6% in those 45-64 but only 25.1% in those aged 65 and older. Whites had a 27.4% prevalence of severe joint pain, compared with 42.0% for Hispanics and 50.9% for blacks. For arthritis patients with a college degree, the age-standardized prevalence of severe joint pain was 15.1%, compared with 35.5% for high school graduates and 54.1% for those with less than a high school degree, based on data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.
“Although persons with arthritis report that pain, or fear of causing or worsening it, is a substantial barrier to exercising, physical activity is an inexpensive intervention that can reduce pain, prevent or delay disability and limitations, and improve mental health, physical functioning, and quality of life with few adverse effects,” wrote Ms. Guglielmo and associates. Adults with severe joint pain “should engage in regular physical activity according to their abilities and avoid physical inactivity [since] even small amounts of physical activity can improve physical functioning in adults with joint conditions.”
SOURCE: Guglielmo D et al. MMWR 2019 May 3;68(17):381-7.
Almost 31% of the estimated 54 million adults in the United States with arthritis have severe joint pain, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Nationally, the prevalence of severe joint pain was 30.8% in adults with arthritis in 2017, but state-specific, age-standardized prevalences varied from a low of 20.8% in Colorado to 45.2% in Mississippi. Regionally, prevalences of both severe joint pain and physical inactivity in arthritis patients were highest in the Southeast, noted Dana Guglielmo, MPH, of the CDC’s National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Atlanta, and associates (MMWR 2019 May 3;68(17):381-7).
The prevalence of arthritis itself was lowest in the District of Columbia at 15.7% and highest in West Virginia at 34.6%. Alabama, at 30.4%, was the only other state above 30%. Colorado had the lowest physical inactivity rate (23.2%), while Kentucky had the highest (44.4%), the investigators said.
The differences among arthritis patients were demographic as well as geographic in 2017. The prevalence of severe joint pain was 33.0% among those aged 18-44 years and 35.6% in those 45-64 but only 25.1% in those aged 65 and older. Whites had a 27.4% prevalence of severe joint pain, compared with 42.0% for Hispanics and 50.9% for blacks. For arthritis patients with a college degree, the age-standardized prevalence of severe joint pain was 15.1%, compared with 35.5% for high school graduates and 54.1% for those with less than a high school degree, based on data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.
“Although persons with arthritis report that pain, or fear of causing or worsening it, is a substantial barrier to exercising, physical activity is an inexpensive intervention that can reduce pain, prevent or delay disability and limitations, and improve mental health, physical functioning, and quality of life with few adverse effects,” wrote Ms. Guglielmo and associates. Adults with severe joint pain “should engage in regular physical activity according to their abilities and avoid physical inactivity [since] even small amounts of physical activity can improve physical functioning in adults with joint conditions.”
SOURCE: Guglielmo D et al. MMWR 2019 May 3;68(17):381-7.
FROM MMWR
Benlysta approved for children with SLE
The B-lymphocyte stimulator–inhibitor called Benlysta already is approved for use in adults alongside standard therapy for SLE, and this approval marks the first such treatment available for children. Although there are regulatory submissions for use of this drug among children elsewhere, the United States is the first to approve its use among this age group, according to a press release from GSK. According to an FDA press announcement, the agency expedited the review and approval because belimumab could fulfill an unmet need.
The approval is based on a 1-year postapproval commitment study, which assessed efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of 10 mg/kg belimumab plus standard therapy versus placebo plus standard therapy among children with SLE aged 5-11 years (n = 13) and those aged 12-17 years (n = 80). Although the study was not fully powered because of the rarity of the disease in this age group, it did find numerically higher SLE responder index response rates over 1 year among children treated with belimumab plus standard therapy (53%) than in those treated with placebo and standard therapy (44%).
Adverse reactions seen among this age group were consistent with those seen in adults, including nausea, diarrhea, pyrexia, nasopharyngitis, and bronchitis. The most common serious adverse reactions were serious infections. Belimumab has not been studied in combination with certain other drugs, such as other biologics or cyclophosphamide; therefore, combining it with such treatments is not recommended. Acute hypersensitivity reactions – including anaphylaxis and death – have been observed, even among patients who had previously tolerated belimumab.
Infusion reactions were common, so pretreat patients with an antihistamine. Also, do not administer the drug with live vaccines, the FDA noted.
More information can be found in the press announcement on the FDA website.
The B-lymphocyte stimulator–inhibitor called Benlysta already is approved for use in adults alongside standard therapy for SLE, and this approval marks the first such treatment available for children. Although there are regulatory submissions for use of this drug among children elsewhere, the United States is the first to approve its use among this age group, according to a press release from GSK. According to an FDA press announcement, the agency expedited the review and approval because belimumab could fulfill an unmet need.
The approval is based on a 1-year postapproval commitment study, which assessed efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of 10 mg/kg belimumab plus standard therapy versus placebo plus standard therapy among children with SLE aged 5-11 years (n = 13) and those aged 12-17 years (n = 80). Although the study was not fully powered because of the rarity of the disease in this age group, it did find numerically higher SLE responder index response rates over 1 year among children treated with belimumab plus standard therapy (53%) than in those treated with placebo and standard therapy (44%).
Adverse reactions seen among this age group were consistent with those seen in adults, including nausea, diarrhea, pyrexia, nasopharyngitis, and bronchitis. The most common serious adverse reactions were serious infections. Belimumab has not been studied in combination with certain other drugs, such as other biologics or cyclophosphamide; therefore, combining it with such treatments is not recommended. Acute hypersensitivity reactions – including anaphylaxis and death – have been observed, even among patients who had previously tolerated belimumab.
Infusion reactions were common, so pretreat patients with an antihistamine. Also, do not administer the drug with live vaccines, the FDA noted.
More information can be found in the press announcement on the FDA website.
The B-lymphocyte stimulator–inhibitor called Benlysta already is approved for use in adults alongside standard therapy for SLE, and this approval marks the first such treatment available for children. Although there are regulatory submissions for use of this drug among children elsewhere, the United States is the first to approve its use among this age group, according to a press release from GSK. According to an FDA press announcement, the agency expedited the review and approval because belimumab could fulfill an unmet need.
The approval is based on a 1-year postapproval commitment study, which assessed efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of 10 mg/kg belimumab plus standard therapy versus placebo plus standard therapy among children with SLE aged 5-11 years (n = 13) and those aged 12-17 years (n = 80). Although the study was not fully powered because of the rarity of the disease in this age group, it did find numerically higher SLE responder index response rates over 1 year among children treated with belimumab plus standard therapy (53%) than in those treated with placebo and standard therapy (44%).
Adverse reactions seen among this age group were consistent with those seen in adults, including nausea, diarrhea, pyrexia, nasopharyngitis, and bronchitis. The most common serious adverse reactions were serious infections. Belimumab has not been studied in combination with certain other drugs, such as other biologics or cyclophosphamide; therefore, combining it with such treatments is not recommended. Acute hypersensitivity reactions – including anaphylaxis and death – have been observed, even among patients who had previously tolerated belimumab.
Infusion reactions were common, so pretreat patients with an antihistamine. Also, do not administer the drug with live vaccines, the FDA noted.
More information can be found in the press announcement on the FDA website.
Twitter chat recap: Take-homes from LUPUS 2019
Despite negative trial findings, belimumab (Benlysta) remains a valid option for black lupus patients, so long as they have high disease activity and positive serology.
That was just one of the many useful messages from a robust question-and-answer session on Twitter April 23, about important findings from the recent LUPUS 2019 Congress in San Francisco. The Twitter chat was hosted by MDedge Rheumatology and led by Jinoos Yazdany, MD, and Gabriela Schmajuk, MD, both associate professors of rheumatology at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). The chat included scores of posts from over a dozen participants, most of them rheumatologists, and it’s worth a recap.
The EMBRACE trial
The belimumab EMBRACE trial was the first topic up to bat. The Food and Drug Administration ordered GlaxoSmithKline to conduct the trial as a condition of approval for lupus in 2011; phase 3 trials found no benefit among a small number of black subjects and even a suggestion of harm.
Although lupus is highly prevalent among black people, and outcomes are generally worse, EMBRACE was the first lupus trial to enroll an entirely black population; 345 patients were treated for a year at 10 mg/kg IV every 4 weeks. Inclusion criteria included disease activity scores of at least 8.
Overall, 49% of belimumab patients, and 42% on placebo, had a positive response, which meant a drop of 4 or more disease activity points, among other things. The difference was not statistically significant (P = .11).
However, GSK’s data showed a statistically significant benefit in favor of belimumab among people who entered with a disease activity score of at least 10 (53% vs. 41% for placebo), as well as for those with low complement levels (47% vs. 25%) and both anti–double stranded DNA antibodies and low complement (45% vs. 24%). Response rates were also significantly higher among the 57% of subjects who lived outside of the United States and Canada.
So what to make of the results?
“The EMBRACE efficacy data seems to reinforce what we already know: belimumab doesn’t work in a lot of patients, and it [has] the best chance of working in patients with higher baseline disease activity,” tweeted Dr. Yazdany.
As for prescribing, Sarah Patterson, MD, a postdoctoral fellow in the UCSF Division of Rheumatology, tweeted that the results “support the use of belimumab for black lupus patients with high disease activity” and positive serology.
For those who don’t fit the treatment profile, “we should take care to not over-use it,” said Megan Clowse, MD, an associate professor of rheumatology at Duke University, Durham, N.C., in a tweet.
The HCQ adherence fail
Poor hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) adherence came up next on Twitter. The chat participants agreed it’s a huge problem, but no one knows why. Perhaps it’s because patients don’t feel a therapeutic effect or perhaps because GI problems and other side effects are worse than doctors think. Maybe there’s simply not enough social support to encourage people to stay on the drug, even though it’s the single most important medication in lupus.
A nine-study meta-analysis presented at LUPUS 2019 suggested a solution: blood levels. The odds of nonadherence were three times higher in patients below threshold HCQ levels, and although not statistically significant, the mean lupus disease activity index score was more than 3 points higher.
A rheumatologist on the chat said that he’s already checking them.
“We have been measuring HCQ for the past 12 months” at Washington University, St. Louis, according to Alfred Kim, MD, PhD, an assistant professor of rheumatology at the school. The data are just now coming in, he said, but it seems to be catching people.
That raised another question on the chat, however: What do you do with people who aren’t down with the program? They’ll be out the door and gone with the wrong words.
“I haven’t figured out the proper tone for when I say ‘So, I see that you haven’t picked up your HCQ in 5 months,’ ” tweeted Dr. Clowse. “It is a really uncomfortable phone call.”
Dr. Kim said that “I ‘gotcha’ them all the time. Guess what typically goes up after they get that 1st HCQ test? Their HCQ levels ... But this rise isn’t durable in our short experience. It goes back down later.”
He tweeted that overall “this is an opportunity to educate patients on the benefits of HCQ ... Most actually do not [know] why they are taking this medication, in our experience.” In another tweet, Dr. Kim said “I tell them I care,” and that checking HCQ levels “is one way of demonstrating how I want to improve their outcomes.”
Tiffany from #LupusChat thought that it’s time for doctors to sit down with patient advocates and hash it out. She tweeted that “I truly feel this would be a positive 1st step ... a two-way conversation that’s non-judgmental and focused on improving” outcomes and quality of life.
Baricitinib for lupus?
The final topic was baricitinib (Olumiant).
There were modest indications of benefit at 4 mg/day oral after 6 months in a phase 2 trial with 314 people. There were also serious infections in 6% versus 2% on 2 mg/day and 1% on placebo. One patient in the 4-mg/day arm (1%) developed deep vein thrombosis (DVT), but they were positive for antiphospholipid antibodies, which raise the clot risk.
Baricitinib is FDA approved as second line at 2 mg/day for adult rheumatoid arthritis; there’s a black box warning of malignancies, thrombosis, and serious infections.
“I’m not sure” the risk-benefit is in the right direction for baricitinib in lupus. “There were a significant number of serious infections ... for not a lot of effect on” disease activity, tweeted the Twitter chat coleader, Dr. Schmajuk. In a separate tweet, she said that, even in nonlupus patients, “we are avoiding [Janus kinase inhibitors] in patients with DVT risk factors. If I were a patient, [I’m] not sure I would want to take the risk.”
“Future studies with larger sample size and longer follow up ... are needed to address some of the concerns related to DVT,” said Zahi Touma, MD, an assistant professor of rheumatology at the University of Toronto.
Despite negative trial findings, belimumab (Benlysta) remains a valid option for black lupus patients, so long as they have high disease activity and positive serology.
That was just one of the many useful messages from a robust question-and-answer session on Twitter April 23, about important findings from the recent LUPUS 2019 Congress in San Francisco. The Twitter chat was hosted by MDedge Rheumatology and led by Jinoos Yazdany, MD, and Gabriela Schmajuk, MD, both associate professors of rheumatology at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). The chat included scores of posts from over a dozen participants, most of them rheumatologists, and it’s worth a recap.
The EMBRACE trial
The belimumab EMBRACE trial was the first topic up to bat. The Food and Drug Administration ordered GlaxoSmithKline to conduct the trial as a condition of approval for lupus in 2011; phase 3 trials found no benefit among a small number of black subjects and even a suggestion of harm.
Although lupus is highly prevalent among black people, and outcomes are generally worse, EMBRACE was the first lupus trial to enroll an entirely black population; 345 patients were treated for a year at 10 mg/kg IV every 4 weeks. Inclusion criteria included disease activity scores of at least 8.
Overall, 49% of belimumab patients, and 42% on placebo, had a positive response, which meant a drop of 4 or more disease activity points, among other things. The difference was not statistically significant (P = .11).
However, GSK’s data showed a statistically significant benefit in favor of belimumab among people who entered with a disease activity score of at least 10 (53% vs. 41% for placebo), as well as for those with low complement levels (47% vs. 25%) and both anti–double stranded DNA antibodies and low complement (45% vs. 24%). Response rates were also significantly higher among the 57% of subjects who lived outside of the United States and Canada.
So what to make of the results?
“The EMBRACE efficacy data seems to reinforce what we already know: belimumab doesn’t work in a lot of patients, and it [has] the best chance of working in patients with higher baseline disease activity,” tweeted Dr. Yazdany.
As for prescribing, Sarah Patterson, MD, a postdoctoral fellow in the UCSF Division of Rheumatology, tweeted that the results “support the use of belimumab for black lupus patients with high disease activity” and positive serology.
For those who don’t fit the treatment profile, “we should take care to not over-use it,” said Megan Clowse, MD, an associate professor of rheumatology at Duke University, Durham, N.C., in a tweet.
The HCQ adherence fail
Poor hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) adherence came up next on Twitter. The chat participants agreed it’s a huge problem, but no one knows why. Perhaps it’s because patients don’t feel a therapeutic effect or perhaps because GI problems and other side effects are worse than doctors think. Maybe there’s simply not enough social support to encourage people to stay on the drug, even though it’s the single most important medication in lupus.
A nine-study meta-analysis presented at LUPUS 2019 suggested a solution: blood levels. The odds of nonadherence were three times higher in patients below threshold HCQ levels, and although not statistically significant, the mean lupus disease activity index score was more than 3 points higher.
A rheumatologist on the chat said that he’s already checking them.
“We have been measuring HCQ for the past 12 months” at Washington University, St. Louis, according to Alfred Kim, MD, PhD, an assistant professor of rheumatology at the school. The data are just now coming in, he said, but it seems to be catching people.
That raised another question on the chat, however: What do you do with people who aren’t down with the program? They’ll be out the door and gone with the wrong words.
“I haven’t figured out the proper tone for when I say ‘So, I see that you haven’t picked up your HCQ in 5 months,’ ” tweeted Dr. Clowse. “It is a really uncomfortable phone call.”
Dr. Kim said that “I ‘gotcha’ them all the time. Guess what typically goes up after they get that 1st HCQ test? Their HCQ levels ... But this rise isn’t durable in our short experience. It goes back down later.”
He tweeted that overall “this is an opportunity to educate patients on the benefits of HCQ ... Most actually do not [know] why they are taking this medication, in our experience.” In another tweet, Dr. Kim said “I tell them I care,” and that checking HCQ levels “is one way of demonstrating how I want to improve their outcomes.”
Tiffany from #LupusChat thought that it’s time for doctors to sit down with patient advocates and hash it out. She tweeted that “I truly feel this would be a positive 1st step ... a two-way conversation that’s non-judgmental and focused on improving” outcomes and quality of life.
Baricitinib for lupus?
The final topic was baricitinib (Olumiant).
There were modest indications of benefit at 4 mg/day oral after 6 months in a phase 2 trial with 314 people. There were also serious infections in 6% versus 2% on 2 mg/day and 1% on placebo. One patient in the 4-mg/day arm (1%) developed deep vein thrombosis (DVT), but they were positive for antiphospholipid antibodies, which raise the clot risk.
Baricitinib is FDA approved as second line at 2 mg/day for adult rheumatoid arthritis; there’s a black box warning of malignancies, thrombosis, and serious infections.
“I’m not sure” the risk-benefit is in the right direction for baricitinib in lupus. “There were a significant number of serious infections ... for not a lot of effect on” disease activity, tweeted the Twitter chat coleader, Dr. Schmajuk. In a separate tweet, she said that, even in nonlupus patients, “we are avoiding [Janus kinase inhibitors] in patients with DVT risk factors. If I were a patient, [I’m] not sure I would want to take the risk.”
“Future studies with larger sample size and longer follow up ... are needed to address some of the concerns related to DVT,” said Zahi Touma, MD, an assistant professor of rheumatology at the University of Toronto.
Despite negative trial findings, belimumab (Benlysta) remains a valid option for black lupus patients, so long as they have high disease activity and positive serology.
That was just one of the many useful messages from a robust question-and-answer session on Twitter April 23, about important findings from the recent LUPUS 2019 Congress in San Francisco. The Twitter chat was hosted by MDedge Rheumatology and led by Jinoos Yazdany, MD, and Gabriela Schmajuk, MD, both associate professors of rheumatology at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). The chat included scores of posts from over a dozen participants, most of them rheumatologists, and it’s worth a recap.
The EMBRACE trial
The belimumab EMBRACE trial was the first topic up to bat. The Food and Drug Administration ordered GlaxoSmithKline to conduct the trial as a condition of approval for lupus in 2011; phase 3 trials found no benefit among a small number of black subjects and even a suggestion of harm.
Although lupus is highly prevalent among black people, and outcomes are generally worse, EMBRACE was the first lupus trial to enroll an entirely black population; 345 patients were treated for a year at 10 mg/kg IV every 4 weeks. Inclusion criteria included disease activity scores of at least 8.
Overall, 49% of belimumab patients, and 42% on placebo, had a positive response, which meant a drop of 4 or more disease activity points, among other things. The difference was not statistically significant (P = .11).
However, GSK’s data showed a statistically significant benefit in favor of belimumab among people who entered with a disease activity score of at least 10 (53% vs. 41% for placebo), as well as for those with low complement levels (47% vs. 25%) and both anti–double stranded DNA antibodies and low complement (45% vs. 24%). Response rates were also significantly higher among the 57% of subjects who lived outside of the United States and Canada.
So what to make of the results?
“The EMBRACE efficacy data seems to reinforce what we already know: belimumab doesn’t work in a lot of patients, and it [has] the best chance of working in patients with higher baseline disease activity,” tweeted Dr. Yazdany.
As for prescribing, Sarah Patterson, MD, a postdoctoral fellow in the UCSF Division of Rheumatology, tweeted that the results “support the use of belimumab for black lupus patients with high disease activity” and positive serology.
For those who don’t fit the treatment profile, “we should take care to not over-use it,” said Megan Clowse, MD, an associate professor of rheumatology at Duke University, Durham, N.C., in a tweet.
The HCQ adherence fail
Poor hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) adherence came up next on Twitter. The chat participants agreed it’s a huge problem, but no one knows why. Perhaps it’s because patients don’t feel a therapeutic effect or perhaps because GI problems and other side effects are worse than doctors think. Maybe there’s simply not enough social support to encourage people to stay on the drug, even though it’s the single most important medication in lupus.
A nine-study meta-analysis presented at LUPUS 2019 suggested a solution: blood levels. The odds of nonadherence were three times higher in patients below threshold HCQ levels, and although not statistically significant, the mean lupus disease activity index score was more than 3 points higher.
A rheumatologist on the chat said that he’s already checking them.
“We have been measuring HCQ for the past 12 months” at Washington University, St. Louis, according to Alfred Kim, MD, PhD, an assistant professor of rheumatology at the school. The data are just now coming in, he said, but it seems to be catching people.
That raised another question on the chat, however: What do you do with people who aren’t down with the program? They’ll be out the door and gone with the wrong words.
“I haven’t figured out the proper tone for when I say ‘So, I see that you haven’t picked up your HCQ in 5 months,’ ” tweeted Dr. Clowse. “It is a really uncomfortable phone call.”
Dr. Kim said that “I ‘gotcha’ them all the time. Guess what typically goes up after they get that 1st HCQ test? Their HCQ levels ... But this rise isn’t durable in our short experience. It goes back down later.”
He tweeted that overall “this is an opportunity to educate patients on the benefits of HCQ ... Most actually do not [know] why they are taking this medication, in our experience.” In another tweet, Dr. Kim said “I tell them I care,” and that checking HCQ levels “is one way of demonstrating how I want to improve their outcomes.”
Tiffany from #LupusChat thought that it’s time for doctors to sit down with patient advocates and hash it out. She tweeted that “I truly feel this would be a positive 1st step ... a two-way conversation that’s non-judgmental and focused on improving” outcomes and quality of life.
Baricitinib for lupus?
The final topic was baricitinib (Olumiant).
There were modest indications of benefit at 4 mg/day oral after 6 months in a phase 2 trial with 314 people. There were also serious infections in 6% versus 2% on 2 mg/day and 1% on placebo. One patient in the 4-mg/day arm (1%) developed deep vein thrombosis (DVT), but they were positive for antiphospholipid antibodies, which raise the clot risk.
Baricitinib is FDA approved as second line at 2 mg/day for adult rheumatoid arthritis; there’s a black box warning of malignancies, thrombosis, and serious infections.
“I’m not sure” the risk-benefit is in the right direction for baricitinib in lupus. “There were a significant number of serious infections ... for not a lot of effect on” disease activity, tweeted the Twitter chat coleader, Dr. Schmajuk. In a separate tweet, she said that, even in nonlupus patients, “we are avoiding [Janus kinase inhibitors] in patients with DVT risk factors. If I were a patient, [I’m] not sure I would want to take the risk.”
“Future studies with larger sample size and longer follow up ... are needed to address some of the concerns related to DVT,” said Zahi Touma, MD, an assistant professor of rheumatology at the University of Toronto.
FROM LUPUS 2019
Measuring hydroxychloroquine blood levels could inform safe, optimal dosing
SAN FRANCISCO – , according to an investigation of the Hopkins Lupus Cohort, an ongoing longitudinal study of lupus patients in the Baltimore area.
As innocuous as the assertions seem, they are anything but. They directly contradict a 2014 investigation from Kaiser Permanente that put the retinopathy risk after 20 years at almost 40%; that finding led directly to an American Academy of Ophthalmology recommendation to reduce the maximum hydroxychloroquine dose from 6.5 mg/kg per day ideal weight to 5 mg/kg real weight, where it remains to this day.
Meanwhile, very few rheumatologists have access to hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) blood levels because most commercial labs don’t offer them. Plasma testing is widely available, but it’s nowhere near as good, according to Michelle Petri, MD, a rheumatology professor at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore; director of the Hopkins Lupus Cohort; and a respected authority on lupus management.
“The Kaiser Permanente study was very worrisome,” she said. “I remember that I thought it didn’t fit my practice at all; I don’t see 40%. It made me even more concerned when the ophthalmologists” reduced the dose, “because hydroxychloroquine is the most important medicine I have for my lupus patients; it is the only one that improves survival. We don’t want to scare our patients into thinking that 40% of them are going to have retinopathy.”
Dueling studies
Dr. Petri’s concerns led her and her team to launch their own investigation; they followed 537 Baltimore cohort members on HCQ as they went through eye exams by Hopkins retinopathy specialists, often with optical coherence tomography (OCT). With a sensitivity of 93% and specificity of 84%, OCT is the best screening method available.
“We found that the risk of retinopathy is not nearly as high as Kaiser Permanente found,” just 11.46% (11/96) with 16-20 years of use, and 8% (6/75) with 21 or more years. On average, “the risk is probably about 10% after 16 or more years, not 40%,” Dr. Petri said at an international congress on systemic lupus erythematosus.
Patients with “possible” retinopathy were not included in the analysis.
When asked for comment, Ronald Melles, MD, a Kaiser ophthalmologist in Redwood City, Calif.; one of the two authors on the Kaiser study; and an author on the subsequent AAO recommendations, stood by his work.
“A rate of 12% retinopathy after 16 years of use ... seems right in line with what we found.” However, “the fact that the rate went down to 8%” after 20 years does not make sense; “the longer you are on the medicine, the more likely you would be to develop the toxicity,” he said.
Maybe the fluctuation had to do with the fact that there were only 75 patients in the Hopkins study on HCQ past 20 years, whereas “we looked at 2,361 patients, and 238 were on the medication for” 20 years or more. Patients over 5.0 mg/kg per day had a 5.67-fold higher risk”of retinopathy, he said (univariate analysis, P less than .001).
Dr. Petri wasn’t buying it. The across the board recommendation was made “without any recognition that if you reduce the dose, you reduce the benefit,” she said.
A new referee: blood levels
Dr. Petri and her team also found that HCQ blood levels correlated with retinopathy, and it was a direct relationship. Patients in the highest maximum tertile (1,753-6,281 ng/mL) had a retinopathy rate of 6.7%, a good deal higher than patients in lower tertiles. It was the same story with the highest mean tertile (1,117-3,513 ng/mL). Retinopathy in that group occurred in 7.9% versus 3.7% or less in lower tertiles. The findings were statistically significant.
Patients in the third tertile “are at the greatest risk, so I reduce their dose,” but “I do not want to reduce the dose across the board” to 5 mg/kg per day; that’s overreach. The tertile approach, if it pans out, might be a better way, she said.
The problem with plasma levels is that HCQ binds to red blood cells, so plasma levels are artificially low and do not indicate the true HCQ load. For now, just one company in the United States offers HCQ blood levels: Exagen.
“We have to get the big companies to start offering” this, and “I want rheumatologists to adopt it. I am lucky at Hopkins [because] we have our own homegrown blood level assay,” she said.
Dr. Melles agreed that tracking blood level makes sense, “but the literature I am aware of has not been able to closely correlate either lupus disease activity or retinal toxicity with blood levels. Also, we have seen some patients at lower doses develop toxicity and other patients on higher doses without any detectable changes.”
Still, “we would like to see [this] studied more, perhaps with newer analytic methods,” said his coauthor on the Kaiser study, and also the lead author on the AAO guidelines, Michael Marmor, MD, professor emeritus of ophthalmology at Stanford (Calif.) University.
In the end, on the same team
Dr. Petri said there is interest among some of her fellow members of the American College of Rheumatology to work with AAO to revise the guidelines. “Until then,” she said, “I want the ophthalmologists to withdraw” them.
She’s worried about undertreatment and believes that the previous AAO guideline, up to 6.5 mg/kg per day ideal weight, was fine, “with some understanding that there are high-risk groups, such as the elderly and people with renal impairment, where the dose should be reduced.”
“No matter how obese a patient is, I cap it at 400 mg/day,” she said, and, with the luxury of HCQ blood level testing, “no matter the weight, if the person is in the upper tertile, I reduce the dose.”
Dr. Marmor agreed that “if rheumatologists prescribe 5 mg/kg real weight and do not stress compliance, some patients may indeed be underdosed.”
“However, that is a fault of the doctor and patient relationship,” he said, “not the guideline; we do not feel it ethical to prescribe higher doses which could increase toxicity in reliable patients ... just because some patients might be unreliable.”
Overall, “I have not heard complaints from rheumatologists in our area, who try hard to follow the current recommendations. ... any doctor can use the dose he or she feels is necessary for a patient. Several recent reports [also] suggest the incidence of toxicity is falling now with usage of AAO guidelines, [and] I am not aware of any data” showing that management has become less effective, he said.
In the meantime, “I assure you that AAO wants ... to serve both specialties, and will change the guidelines when there is new, defensible data,” he added.
The Hopkins team found that the risk of HCQ retinopathy was highest in men and white patients, as well as older people. Body mass index and hypertension also predicted retina issues.
“As screening tests are frequently abnormal due to causes other than HCQ ... stopping [it] based on an abnormal test without confirmation from a retinopathy expert could needlessly deprive an SLE patient of an important medication,” they said.
The Hopkins Lupus Cohort is funded by the National Institutes of Health. The physicians didn’t have any relevant disclosures.
SOURCES: Petri M et al. Lupus Sci Med. 2019;6(suppl 1). Abstracts 15 and 16.
SAN FRANCISCO – , according to an investigation of the Hopkins Lupus Cohort, an ongoing longitudinal study of lupus patients in the Baltimore area.
As innocuous as the assertions seem, they are anything but. They directly contradict a 2014 investigation from Kaiser Permanente that put the retinopathy risk after 20 years at almost 40%; that finding led directly to an American Academy of Ophthalmology recommendation to reduce the maximum hydroxychloroquine dose from 6.5 mg/kg per day ideal weight to 5 mg/kg real weight, where it remains to this day.
Meanwhile, very few rheumatologists have access to hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) blood levels because most commercial labs don’t offer them. Plasma testing is widely available, but it’s nowhere near as good, according to Michelle Petri, MD, a rheumatology professor at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore; director of the Hopkins Lupus Cohort; and a respected authority on lupus management.
“The Kaiser Permanente study was very worrisome,” she said. “I remember that I thought it didn’t fit my practice at all; I don’t see 40%. It made me even more concerned when the ophthalmologists” reduced the dose, “because hydroxychloroquine is the most important medicine I have for my lupus patients; it is the only one that improves survival. We don’t want to scare our patients into thinking that 40% of them are going to have retinopathy.”
Dueling studies
Dr. Petri’s concerns led her and her team to launch their own investigation; they followed 537 Baltimore cohort members on HCQ as they went through eye exams by Hopkins retinopathy specialists, often with optical coherence tomography (OCT). With a sensitivity of 93% and specificity of 84%, OCT is the best screening method available.
“We found that the risk of retinopathy is not nearly as high as Kaiser Permanente found,” just 11.46% (11/96) with 16-20 years of use, and 8% (6/75) with 21 or more years. On average, “the risk is probably about 10% after 16 or more years, not 40%,” Dr. Petri said at an international congress on systemic lupus erythematosus.
Patients with “possible” retinopathy were not included in the analysis.
When asked for comment, Ronald Melles, MD, a Kaiser ophthalmologist in Redwood City, Calif.; one of the two authors on the Kaiser study; and an author on the subsequent AAO recommendations, stood by his work.
“A rate of 12% retinopathy after 16 years of use ... seems right in line with what we found.” However, “the fact that the rate went down to 8%” after 20 years does not make sense; “the longer you are on the medicine, the more likely you would be to develop the toxicity,” he said.
Maybe the fluctuation had to do with the fact that there were only 75 patients in the Hopkins study on HCQ past 20 years, whereas “we looked at 2,361 patients, and 238 were on the medication for” 20 years or more. Patients over 5.0 mg/kg per day had a 5.67-fold higher risk”of retinopathy, he said (univariate analysis, P less than .001).
Dr. Petri wasn’t buying it. The across the board recommendation was made “without any recognition that if you reduce the dose, you reduce the benefit,” she said.
A new referee: blood levels
Dr. Petri and her team also found that HCQ blood levels correlated with retinopathy, and it was a direct relationship. Patients in the highest maximum tertile (1,753-6,281 ng/mL) had a retinopathy rate of 6.7%, a good deal higher than patients in lower tertiles. It was the same story with the highest mean tertile (1,117-3,513 ng/mL). Retinopathy in that group occurred in 7.9% versus 3.7% or less in lower tertiles. The findings were statistically significant.
Patients in the third tertile “are at the greatest risk, so I reduce their dose,” but “I do not want to reduce the dose across the board” to 5 mg/kg per day; that’s overreach. The tertile approach, if it pans out, might be a better way, she said.
The problem with plasma levels is that HCQ binds to red blood cells, so plasma levels are artificially low and do not indicate the true HCQ load. For now, just one company in the United States offers HCQ blood levels: Exagen.
“We have to get the big companies to start offering” this, and “I want rheumatologists to adopt it. I am lucky at Hopkins [because] we have our own homegrown blood level assay,” she said.
Dr. Melles agreed that tracking blood level makes sense, “but the literature I am aware of has not been able to closely correlate either lupus disease activity or retinal toxicity with blood levels. Also, we have seen some patients at lower doses develop toxicity and other patients on higher doses without any detectable changes.”
Still, “we would like to see [this] studied more, perhaps with newer analytic methods,” said his coauthor on the Kaiser study, and also the lead author on the AAO guidelines, Michael Marmor, MD, professor emeritus of ophthalmology at Stanford (Calif.) University.
In the end, on the same team
Dr. Petri said there is interest among some of her fellow members of the American College of Rheumatology to work with AAO to revise the guidelines. “Until then,” she said, “I want the ophthalmologists to withdraw” them.
She’s worried about undertreatment and believes that the previous AAO guideline, up to 6.5 mg/kg per day ideal weight, was fine, “with some understanding that there are high-risk groups, such as the elderly and people with renal impairment, where the dose should be reduced.”
“No matter how obese a patient is, I cap it at 400 mg/day,” she said, and, with the luxury of HCQ blood level testing, “no matter the weight, if the person is in the upper tertile, I reduce the dose.”
Dr. Marmor agreed that “if rheumatologists prescribe 5 mg/kg real weight and do not stress compliance, some patients may indeed be underdosed.”
“However, that is a fault of the doctor and patient relationship,” he said, “not the guideline; we do not feel it ethical to prescribe higher doses which could increase toxicity in reliable patients ... just because some patients might be unreliable.”
Overall, “I have not heard complaints from rheumatologists in our area, who try hard to follow the current recommendations. ... any doctor can use the dose he or she feels is necessary for a patient. Several recent reports [also] suggest the incidence of toxicity is falling now with usage of AAO guidelines, [and] I am not aware of any data” showing that management has become less effective, he said.
In the meantime, “I assure you that AAO wants ... to serve both specialties, and will change the guidelines when there is new, defensible data,” he added.
The Hopkins team found that the risk of HCQ retinopathy was highest in men and white patients, as well as older people. Body mass index and hypertension also predicted retina issues.
“As screening tests are frequently abnormal due to causes other than HCQ ... stopping [it] based on an abnormal test without confirmation from a retinopathy expert could needlessly deprive an SLE patient of an important medication,” they said.
The Hopkins Lupus Cohort is funded by the National Institutes of Health. The physicians didn’t have any relevant disclosures.
SOURCES: Petri M et al. Lupus Sci Med. 2019;6(suppl 1). Abstracts 15 and 16.
SAN FRANCISCO – , according to an investigation of the Hopkins Lupus Cohort, an ongoing longitudinal study of lupus patients in the Baltimore area.
As innocuous as the assertions seem, they are anything but. They directly contradict a 2014 investigation from Kaiser Permanente that put the retinopathy risk after 20 years at almost 40%; that finding led directly to an American Academy of Ophthalmology recommendation to reduce the maximum hydroxychloroquine dose from 6.5 mg/kg per day ideal weight to 5 mg/kg real weight, where it remains to this day.
Meanwhile, very few rheumatologists have access to hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) blood levels because most commercial labs don’t offer them. Plasma testing is widely available, but it’s nowhere near as good, according to Michelle Petri, MD, a rheumatology professor at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore; director of the Hopkins Lupus Cohort; and a respected authority on lupus management.
“The Kaiser Permanente study was very worrisome,” she said. “I remember that I thought it didn’t fit my practice at all; I don’t see 40%. It made me even more concerned when the ophthalmologists” reduced the dose, “because hydroxychloroquine is the most important medicine I have for my lupus patients; it is the only one that improves survival. We don’t want to scare our patients into thinking that 40% of them are going to have retinopathy.”
Dueling studies
Dr. Petri’s concerns led her and her team to launch their own investigation; they followed 537 Baltimore cohort members on HCQ as they went through eye exams by Hopkins retinopathy specialists, often with optical coherence tomography (OCT). With a sensitivity of 93% and specificity of 84%, OCT is the best screening method available.
“We found that the risk of retinopathy is not nearly as high as Kaiser Permanente found,” just 11.46% (11/96) with 16-20 years of use, and 8% (6/75) with 21 or more years. On average, “the risk is probably about 10% after 16 or more years, not 40%,” Dr. Petri said at an international congress on systemic lupus erythematosus.
Patients with “possible” retinopathy were not included in the analysis.
When asked for comment, Ronald Melles, MD, a Kaiser ophthalmologist in Redwood City, Calif.; one of the two authors on the Kaiser study; and an author on the subsequent AAO recommendations, stood by his work.
“A rate of 12% retinopathy after 16 years of use ... seems right in line with what we found.” However, “the fact that the rate went down to 8%” after 20 years does not make sense; “the longer you are on the medicine, the more likely you would be to develop the toxicity,” he said.
Maybe the fluctuation had to do with the fact that there were only 75 patients in the Hopkins study on HCQ past 20 years, whereas “we looked at 2,361 patients, and 238 were on the medication for” 20 years or more. Patients over 5.0 mg/kg per day had a 5.67-fold higher risk”of retinopathy, he said (univariate analysis, P less than .001).
Dr. Petri wasn’t buying it. The across the board recommendation was made “without any recognition that if you reduce the dose, you reduce the benefit,” she said.
A new referee: blood levels
Dr. Petri and her team also found that HCQ blood levels correlated with retinopathy, and it was a direct relationship. Patients in the highest maximum tertile (1,753-6,281 ng/mL) had a retinopathy rate of 6.7%, a good deal higher than patients in lower tertiles. It was the same story with the highest mean tertile (1,117-3,513 ng/mL). Retinopathy in that group occurred in 7.9% versus 3.7% or less in lower tertiles. The findings were statistically significant.
Patients in the third tertile “are at the greatest risk, so I reduce their dose,” but “I do not want to reduce the dose across the board” to 5 mg/kg per day; that’s overreach. The tertile approach, if it pans out, might be a better way, she said.
The problem with plasma levels is that HCQ binds to red blood cells, so plasma levels are artificially low and do not indicate the true HCQ load. For now, just one company in the United States offers HCQ blood levels: Exagen.
“We have to get the big companies to start offering” this, and “I want rheumatologists to adopt it. I am lucky at Hopkins [because] we have our own homegrown blood level assay,” she said.
Dr. Melles agreed that tracking blood level makes sense, “but the literature I am aware of has not been able to closely correlate either lupus disease activity or retinal toxicity with blood levels. Also, we have seen some patients at lower doses develop toxicity and other patients on higher doses without any detectable changes.”
Still, “we would like to see [this] studied more, perhaps with newer analytic methods,” said his coauthor on the Kaiser study, and also the lead author on the AAO guidelines, Michael Marmor, MD, professor emeritus of ophthalmology at Stanford (Calif.) University.
In the end, on the same team
Dr. Petri said there is interest among some of her fellow members of the American College of Rheumatology to work with AAO to revise the guidelines. “Until then,” she said, “I want the ophthalmologists to withdraw” them.
She’s worried about undertreatment and believes that the previous AAO guideline, up to 6.5 mg/kg per day ideal weight, was fine, “with some understanding that there are high-risk groups, such as the elderly and people with renal impairment, where the dose should be reduced.”
“No matter how obese a patient is, I cap it at 400 mg/day,” she said, and, with the luxury of HCQ blood level testing, “no matter the weight, if the person is in the upper tertile, I reduce the dose.”
Dr. Marmor agreed that “if rheumatologists prescribe 5 mg/kg real weight and do not stress compliance, some patients may indeed be underdosed.”
“However, that is a fault of the doctor and patient relationship,” he said, “not the guideline; we do not feel it ethical to prescribe higher doses which could increase toxicity in reliable patients ... just because some patients might be unreliable.”
Overall, “I have not heard complaints from rheumatologists in our area, who try hard to follow the current recommendations. ... any doctor can use the dose he or she feels is necessary for a patient. Several recent reports [also] suggest the incidence of toxicity is falling now with usage of AAO guidelines, [and] I am not aware of any data” showing that management has become less effective, he said.
In the meantime, “I assure you that AAO wants ... to serve both specialties, and will change the guidelines when there is new, defensible data,” he added.
The Hopkins team found that the risk of HCQ retinopathy was highest in men and white patients, as well as older people. Body mass index and hypertension also predicted retina issues.
“As screening tests are frequently abnormal due to causes other than HCQ ... stopping [it] based on an abnormal test without confirmation from a retinopathy expert could needlessly deprive an SLE patient of an important medication,” they said.
The Hopkins Lupus Cohort is funded by the National Institutes of Health. The physicians didn’t have any relevant disclosures.
SOURCES: Petri M et al. Lupus Sci Med. 2019;6(suppl 1). Abstracts 15 and 16.
REPORTING FROM LUPUS 2019
Studies begin to pinpoint ways to diagnose SLE earlier
SAN FRANCISCO – A host of novel clinical and serologic findings that physicians can put to good use right now in helping to distinguish early SLE from its many mimickers have been identified in a large study conducted on four continents, Marta Mosca, MD, PhD, observed at an international congress on systemic lupus erythematosus.
These useful findings aren’t incorporated into the current American College of Rheumatology (ACR) or Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) lupus classification criteria, which have come under criticism for limited sensitivity in identifying early SLE. Some of the novel findings provide support for increased suspicion of early SLE, while others suggest a need to veer in another direction and assess a patient for a disease other than lupus. The study has served to provide input for the proposed new ACR/EULAR weighted SLE classification criteria, although that scheme is meant to be used only for research and not in clinical practice, explained Dr. Mosca of the University of Pisa (Italy).
She was lead author of the four-continent study, which included 616 patients referred to experienced academic lupus centers for possible SLE with a symptom duration of less than 1 year. During up to 3 years of follow-up, 389 patients were diagnosed as having SLE by experienced rheumatologists based upon their clinical judgment, without any requirement to meet the full ACR or SLICC classification criteria. The other 227 patients were determined to be SLE mimickers with conditions including lymphoma, Sjögren’s syndrome, systemic sclerosis, interstitial lung disease, fibromyalgia, antinuclear antibody–positive thyroiditis, and undifferentiated connective tissue disease.
Dr. Mosca also highlighted key recent work by other investigators aimed at speeding the diagnosis of SLE and shortening the duration of what she called “the gray zone” of diagnostic uncertainty, when autoantibodies and insidious symptoms are present but not yet sufficient to make the diagnosis of SLE by conventional criteria. It’s well established that 60%-70% of patients with mild undifferentiated connective tissue disease will remain stable without evolving into SLE during long years of follow-up.
The ultimate objective of all this work is to try to change the natural history of the disease through targeted early aggressive therapy aimed at minimizing the extent of active disease and preventing severe organ involvement.
Among the key takeaways from the four-continent study led by Dr. Mosca: Fever not related to infection was far more prevalent in early SLE than in mimicking conditions, by a margin of 34.5% versus 13.7%. On the other hand, Raynaud’s phenomenon was more than twice as prevalent among patients with mimicking conditions: 22.1% in early SLE, compared with 48.5% in SLE mimickers. Sicca symptoms were present in just 4.4% of early SLE patients versus 34.4% of SLE mimickers. Only 0.3% of early SLE patients complained of dysphagia; the rate was 20-fold higher in the SLE mimickers. Rashes atypical for lupus were twice as frequent in the SLE mimicking conditions (Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019 Jan;71[1]:91-8).
Turning to key differentiating serologic findings, Dr. Mosca noted that anti-double stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) and anti-Sm antibodies were present in 71.7% and 30.2% of early SLE patients, respectively, compared with 6.9% and 2.6% of SLE mimickers. Anticardiolipin IgM, a positive Coombs test, anti-beta2 glycoprotein-I antibodies, leukopenia, autoimmune hemolytic anemia, and hypocomplementemia were all significantly more common in the early SLE cohort.
In contrast, antibodies to Ro (SS-A) and La (SS-B) were of no value in separating early SLE from its mimickers, according to Dr. Mosca.
Other tipoffs to early SLE
Two separate teams of British researchers have advanced the field in a highly practical way. One group showed in a study of 1,739 newly diagnosed SLE patients and 6,956 controls that in the 5 years prior to diagnosis, the SLE group averaged 9.2 primary care visits per year, compared with 3.8 for controls. The visits clustered around nonspecific complaints of arthritis and arthralgias, alopecia, and rash (Arthritis Care Res. 2017 Jun;69[6]:833-41).
“An accumulating number of primary care office visits and referrals over time should raise suspicion,” Dr. Mosca said.
Other investigators, working with 1,426 cases of newly diagnosed SLE in the U.K. Clinical Practice Research Database, observed that the proportion of patients with disease manifestations in three or more British Isles Lupus Activity Group (BILAG) symptom domains rose from 18.7% at 3 years prior to diagnosis to 39.7% in the year before diagnosis (Lupus Sci Med. 2017 Feb 10;4[1]:e000172. doi: 10.1136/lupus-2016-000172).
“These patients accrue clinical manifestations. It’s not just one symptom, it’s more of a state of being unwell. This is a suspicious factor for the development of lupus,” she continued.
And just as patients who will eventually be diagnosed with SLE accrue a growing number of signs and symptoms during the run up to diagnosis, they also accrue multiple autoantibodies. Moreover, as demonstrated by a multicenter group of U.S. investigators, patients also develop elevated levels of multiple soluble inflammatory markers more than 3.5 years prior to diagnosis of SLE. These include interleukins-5 and -6 and interferon-gamma. And less than 10 months prior to being classified as having SLE, patients develop significantly higher levels of B lymphocyte stimulator (BLyS) and a proliferation-inducing ligand known as APRIL. The investigators developed a predictive model incorporating IL-5, -6, and interferon-gamma levels with antinuclear antibody status that identified future SLE patients with 84% accuracy more than 3.5 years before diagnosis. This could prove useful in selecting high-risk patients for clinical prevention trials (J Autoimmun. 2016 Nov;74:182-93).
Researchers at the University of Leeds (England) have also zeroed in on interferon activity as playing a key role in progression from asymptomatic antinuclear antigen positivity, which is present in up to 25% of the general population, to symptomatic autoimmune connective tissue disease, which affects less than 1%. A multivariate logistic regression analysis identified two independent predictors of development of autoimmune connective tissue disease within the next 12 months: a family history of autoimmune rheumatic disease, which was associated with an 8.2-fold increased risk; and positivity for a pattern of interferon-stimulated gene activity they call IFN-Score-B (Ann Rheum Dis. 2018 Oct;77[10]:1432-9).
All of this work has led up to what Dr. Mosca called “a glance into the future”: the National Institutes of Health–supported Study of Anti-Malarials in Incomplete Lupus Erythematosus (SMILE), which is now recruiting patients. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter U.S. trial involves patients who are antinuclear antibody positive at a titer of 1:80 or more plus one or two additional criteria from the SLICC classification scheme. Participants are being randomized to 96 weeks of hydroxychloroquine or placebo. The goal is to learn whether hydroxychloroquine can slow disease progression, with the primary endpoint being the number of SLICC criteria met at the study’s end. The trial will also scrutinize potential biomarkers that could be used to guide treatment decisions (Trials. 2018 Dec 20;19[1]:694. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-3076-7).
Dr. Mosca reported serving as an adviser to UCB and Lilly.
SAN FRANCISCO – A host of novel clinical and serologic findings that physicians can put to good use right now in helping to distinguish early SLE from its many mimickers have been identified in a large study conducted on four continents, Marta Mosca, MD, PhD, observed at an international congress on systemic lupus erythematosus.
These useful findings aren’t incorporated into the current American College of Rheumatology (ACR) or Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) lupus classification criteria, which have come under criticism for limited sensitivity in identifying early SLE. Some of the novel findings provide support for increased suspicion of early SLE, while others suggest a need to veer in another direction and assess a patient for a disease other than lupus. The study has served to provide input for the proposed new ACR/EULAR weighted SLE classification criteria, although that scheme is meant to be used only for research and not in clinical practice, explained Dr. Mosca of the University of Pisa (Italy).
She was lead author of the four-continent study, which included 616 patients referred to experienced academic lupus centers for possible SLE with a symptom duration of less than 1 year. During up to 3 years of follow-up, 389 patients were diagnosed as having SLE by experienced rheumatologists based upon their clinical judgment, without any requirement to meet the full ACR or SLICC classification criteria. The other 227 patients were determined to be SLE mimickers with conditions including lymphoma, Sjögren’s syndrome, systemic sclerosis, interstitial lung disease, fibromyalgia, antinuclear antibody–positive thyroiditis, and undifferentiated connective tissue disease.
Dr. Mosca also highlighted key recent work by other investigators aimed at speeding the diagnosis of SLE and shortening the duration of what she called “the gray zone” of diagnostic uncertainty, when autoantibodies and insidious symptoms are present but not yet sufficient to make the diagnosis of SLE by conventional criteria. It’s well established that 60%-70% of patients with mild undifferentiated connective tissue disease will remain stable without evolving into SLE during long years of follow-up.
The ultimate objective of all this work is to try to change the natural history of the disease through targeted early aggressive therapy aimed at minimizing the extent of active disease and preventing severe organ involvement.
Among the key takeaways from the four-continent study led by Dr. Mosca: Fever not related to infection was far more prevalent in early SLE than in mimicking conditions, by a margin of 34.5% versus 13.7%. On the other hand, Raynaud’s phenomenon was more than twice as prevalent among patients with mimicking conditions: 22.1% in early SLE, compared with 48.5% in SLE mimickers. Sicca symptoms were present in just 4.4% of early SLE patients versus 34.4% of SLE mimickers. Only 0.3% of early SLE patients complained of dysphagia; the rate was 20-fold higher in the SLE mimickers. Rashes atypical for lupus were twice as frequent in the SLE mimicking conditions (Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019 Jan;71[1]:91-8).
Turning to key differentiating serologic findings, Dr. Mosca noted that anti-double stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) and anti-Sm antibodies were present in 71.7% and 30.2% of early SLE patients, respectively, compared with 6.9% and 2.6% of SLE mimickers. Anticardiolipin IgM, a positive Coombs test, anti-beta2 glycoprotein-I antibodies, leukopenia, autoimmune hemolytic anemia, and hypocomplementemia were all significantly more common in the early SLE cohort.
In contrast, antibodies to Ro (SS-A) and La (SS-B) were of no value in separating early SLE from its mimickers, according to Dr. Mosca.
Other tipoffs to early SLE
Two separate teams of British researchers have advanced the field in a highly practical way. One group showed in a study of 1,739 newly diagnosed SLE patients and 6,956 controls that in the 5 years prior to diagnosis, the SLE group averaged 9.2 primary care visits per year, compared with 3.8 for controls. The visits clustered around nonspecific complaints of arthritis and arthralgias, alopecia, and rash (Arthritis Care Res. 2017 Jun;69[6]:833-41).
“An accumulating number of primary care office visits and referrals over time should raise suspicion,” Dr. Mosca said.
Other investigators, working with 1,426 cases of newly diagnosed SLE in the U.K. Clinical Practice Research Database, observed that the proportion of patients with disease manifestations in three or more British Isles Lupus Activity Group (BILAG) symptom domains rose from 18.7% at 3 years prior to diagnosis to 39.7% in the year before diagnosis (Lupus Sci Med. 2017 Feb 10;4[1]:e000172. doi: 10.1136/lupus-2016-000172).
“These patients accrue clinical manifestations. It’s not just one symptom, it’s more of a state of being unwell. This is a suspicious factor for the development of lupus,” she continued.
And just as patients who will eventually be diagnosed with SLE accrue a growing number of signs and symptoms during the run up to diagnosis, they also accrue multiple autoantibodies. Moreover, as demonstrated by a multicenter group of U.S. investigators, patients also develop elevated levels of multiple soluble inflammatory markers more than 3.5 years prior to diagnosis of SLE. These include interleukins-5 and -6 and interferon-gamma. And less than 10 months prior to being classified as having SLE, patients develop significantly higher levels of B lymphocyte stimulator (BLyS) and a proliferation-inducing ligand known as APRIL. The investigators developed a predictive model incorporating IL-5, -6, and interferon-gamma levels with antinuclear antibody status that identified future SLE patients with 84% accuracy more than 3.5 years before diagnosis. This could prove useful in selecting high-risk patients for clinical prevention trials (J Autoimmun. 2016 Nov;74:182-93).
Researchers at the University of Leeds (England) have also zeroed in on interferon activity as playing a key role in progression from asymptomatic antinuclear antigen positivity, which is present in up to 25% of the general population, to symptomatic autoimmune connective tissue disease, which affects less than 1%. A multivariate logistic regression analysis identified two independent predictors of development of autoimmune connective tissue disease within the next 12 months: a family history of autoimmune rheumatic disease, which was associated with an 8.2-fold increased risk; and positivity for a pattern of interferon-stimulated gene activity they call IFN-Score-B (Ann Rheum Dis. 2018 Oct;77[10]:1432-9).
All of this work has led up to what Dr. Mosca called “a glance into the future”: the National Institutes of Health–supported Study of Anti-Malarials in Incomplete Lupus Erythematosus (SMILE), which is now recruiting patients. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter U.S. trial involves patients who are antinuclear antibody positive at a titer of 1:80 or more plus one or two additional criteria from the SLICC classification scheme. Participants are being randomized to 96 weeks of hydroxychloroquine or placebo. The goal is to learn whether hydroxychloroquine can slow disease progression, with the primary endpoint being the number of SLICC criteria met at the study’s end. The trial will also scrutinize potential biomarkers that could be used to guide treatment decisions (Trials. 2018 Dec 20;19[1]:694. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-3076-7).
Dr. Mosca reported serving as an adviser to UCB and Lilly.
SAN FRANCISCO – A host of novel clinical and serologic findings that physicians can put to good use right now in helping to distinguish early SLE from its many mimickers have been identified in a large study conducted on four continents, Marta Mosca, MD, PhD, observed at an international congress on systemic lupus erythematosus.
These useful findings aren’t incorporated into the current American College of Rheumatology (ACR) or Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) lupus classification criteria, which have come under criticism for limited sensitivity in identifying early SLE. Some of the novel findings provide support for increased suspicion of early SLE, while others suggest a need to veer in another direction and assess a patient for a disease other than lupus. The study has served to provide input for the proposed new ACR/EULAR weighted SLE classification criteria, although that scheme is meant to be used only for research and not in clinical practice, explained Dr. Mosca of the University of Pisa (Italy).
She was lead author of the four-continent study, which included 616 patients referred to experienced academic lupus centers for possible SLE with a symptom duration of less than 1 year. During up to 3 years of follow-up, 389 patients were diagnosed as having SLE by experienced rheumatologists based upon their clinical judgment, without any requirement to meet the full ACR or SLICC classification criteria. The other 227 patients were determined to be SLE mimickers with conditions including lymphoma, Sjögren’s syndrome, systemic sclerosis, interstitial lung disease, fibromyalgia, antinuclear antibody–positive thyroiditis, and undifferentiated connective tissue disease.
Dr. Mosca also highlighted key recent work by other investigators aimed at speeding the diagnosis of SLE and shortening the duration of what she called “the gray zone” of diagnostic uncertainty, when autoantibodies and insidious symptoms are present but not yet sufficient to make the diagnosis of SLE by conventional criteria. It’s well established that 60%-70% of patients with mild undifferentiated connective tissue disease will remain stable without evolving into SLE during long years of follow-up.
The ultimate objective of all this work is to try to change the natural history of the disease through targeted early aggressive therapy aimed at minimizing the extent of active disease and preventing severe organ involvement.
Among the key takeaways from the four-continent study led by Dr. Mosca: Fever not related to infection was far more prevalent in early SLE than in mimicking conditions, by a margin of 34.5% versus 13.7%. On the other hand, Raynaud’s phenomenon was more than twice as prevalent among patients with mimicking conditions: 22.1% in early SLE, compared with 48.5% in SLE mimickers. Sicca symptoms were present in just 4.4% of early SLE patients versus 34.4% of SLE mimickers. Only 0.3% of early SLE patients complained of dysphagia; the rate was 20-fold higher in the SLE mimickers. Rashes atypical for lupus were twice as frequent in the SLE mimicking conditions (Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019 Jan;71[1]:91-8).
Turning to key differentiating serologic findings, Dr. Mosca noted that anti-double stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) and anti-Sm antibodies were present in 71.7% and 30.2% of early SLE patients, respectively, compared with 6.9% and 2.6% of SLE mimickers. Anticardiolipin IgM, a positive Coombs test, anti-beta2 glycoprotein-I antibodies, leukopenia, autoimmune hemolytic anemia, and hypocomplementemia were all significantly more common in the early SLE cohort.
In contrast, antibodies to Ro (SS-A) and La (SS-B) were of no value in separating early SLE from its mimickers, according to Dr. Mosca.
Other tipoffs to early SLE
Two separate teams of British researchers have advanced the field in a highly practical way. One group showed in a study of 1,739 newly diagnosed SLE patients and 6,956 controls that in the 5 years prior to diagnosis, the SLE group averaged 9.2 primary care visits per year, compared with 3.8 for controls. The visits clustered around nonspecific complaints of arthritis and arthralgias, alopecia, and rash (Arthritis Care Res. 2017 Jun;69[6]:833-41).
“An accumulating number of primary care office visits and referrals over time should raise suspicion,” Dr. Mosca said.
Other investigators, working with 1,426 cases of newly diagnosed SLE in the U.K. Clinical Practice Research Database, observed that the proportion of patients with disease manifestations in three or more British Isles Lupus Activity Group (BILAG) symptom domains rose from 18.7% at 3 years prior to diagnosis to 39.7% in the year before diagnosis (Lupus Sci Med. 2017 Feb 10;4[1]:e000172. doi: 10.1136/lupus-2016-000172).
“These patients accrue clinical manifestations. It’s not just one symptom, it’s more of a state of being unwell. This is a suspicious factor for the development of lupus,” she continued.
And just as patients who will eventually be diagnosed with SLE accrue a growing number of signs and symptoms during the run up to diagnosis, they also accrue multiple autoantibodies. Moreover, as demonstrated by a multicenter group of U.S. investigators, patients also develop elevated levels of multiple soluble inflammatory markers more than 3.5 years prior to diagnosis of SLE. These include interleukins-5 and -6 and interferon-gamma. And less than 10 months prior to being classified as having SLE, patients develop significantly higher levels of B lymphocyte stimulator (BLyS) and a proliferation-inducing ligand known as APRIL. The investigators developed a predictive model incorporating IL-5, -6, and interferon-gamma levels with antinuclear antibody status that identified future SLE patients with 84% accuracy more than 3.5 years before diagnosis. This could prove useful in selecting high-risk patients for clinical prevention trials (J Autoimmun. 2016 Nov;74:182-93).
Researchers at the University of Leeds (England) have also zeroed in on interferon activity as playing a key role in progression from asymptomatic antinuclear antigen positivity, which is present in up to 25% of the general population, to symptomatic autoimmune connective tissue disease, which affects less than 1%. A multivariate logistic regression analysis identified two independent predictors of development of autoimmune connective tissue disease within the next 12 months: a family history of autoimmune rheumatic disease, which was associated with an 8.2-fold increased risk; and positivity for a pattern of interferon-stimulated gene activity they call IFN-Score-B (Ann Rheum Dis. 2018 Oct;77[10]:1432-9).
All of this work has led up to what Dr. Mosca called “a glance into the future”: the National Institutes of Health–supported Study of Anti-Malarials in Incomplete Lupus Erythematosus (SMILE), which is now recruiting patients. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter U.S. trial involves patients who are antinuclear antibody positive at a titer of 1:80 or more plus one or two additional criteria from the SLICC classification scheme. Participants are being randomized to 96 weeks of hydroxychloroquine or placebo. The goal is to learn whether hydroxychloroquine can slow disease progression, with the primary endpoint being the number of SLICC criteria met at the study’s end. The trial will also scrutinize potential biomarkers that could be used to guide treatment decisions (Trials. 2018 Dec 20;19[1]:694. doi: 10.1186/s13063-018-3076-7).
Dr. Mosca reported serving as an adviser to UCB and Lilly.
REPORTING FROM LUPUS 2019