Immunogenicity of TNF-Inhibitors

Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) have significantly improved treatment outcome of rheumatic diseases since their incorporation into treatment protocols two decades ago. Nevertheless, a substantial fraction of patients experiences either primary or secondary failure to TNFi due to ineffectiveness of the drug or adverse reactions. Secondary failure and adverse events can be related to the development of anti-drug antibodies (ADA). The earliest studies that reported ADA toward TNFi mainly used drug-sensitive assays. Retrospectively, we recognize this has led to an underestimation of the amount of ADA produced due to drug interference. Drug-tolerant ADA assays also detect ADA in the presence of drug, which has contributed to the currently reported higher incidence of ADA development. Comprehension and awareness of the assay format used for ADA detection is thus essential to interpret ADA measurements correctly. In addition, a concurrent drug level measurement is informative as it may provide insight in the extent of underestimation of ADA levels and improves understanding the clinical consequences of ADA formation. The clinical effects are dependent on the ratio between the amount of drug that is neutralized by ADA and the amount of unbound drug. Pharmacokinetic modeling might be useful in this context. The ADA response generally gives rise to high affinity IgG antibodies, but this response will differ between patients. Some patients will not reach the phase of affinity maturation while others generate an enduring high titer high affinity IgG response. This response can be transient in some patients, indicating a mechanism of tolerance induction or B-cell anergy. In this review several different aspects of the ADA response toward TNFi will be discussed. It will highlight the ADA assays, characteristics and regulation of the ADA response, impact of immunogenicity on the pharmacokinetics of TNFi, clinical implications of ADA formation, and possible mitigation strategies

Drug-tolerant detection of anti-drug antibodies in an antigen-binding assay using europium chelate fluorescence

Accurate anti-drug antibody (ADA) measurements in patient sera requires dissociation of ADA-drug complexes combined with sensitive and specific ADA detection. Bridging type immunoassays are often used despite several disadvantages associated with this approach. A good drug-tolerant alternative is the acid-dissociation radioimmunoassay (ARIA), but this method is not easily implemented in most labs as specialized facilities are required for working with radioactive materials. We describe an innovative method for ADA detection that combines the advantages of antigen binding tests like the ARIA with the convenience of regular immunoassays. This acid-dissociation lanthanide-fluorescence immunoassay (ALFIA) involves dissociation of ADA-drug complexes, followed by binding to an europium-labeled drug derivative and subsequently an IgG pulldown on Sepharose beads. After europium elution, detection is achieved by measuring time-resolved fluorescence originating from europium chelate complexes. We measured anti-adalimumab ADA levels in sera of 94 rheumatoid arthritis patients using the ALFIA and showed this method to be highly drug tolerant, sensitive and specific for anti-adalimumab ADAs

Using adalimumab serum concentration to choose a subsequent biological DMARD in rheumatoid arthritis patients failing adalimumab treatment (ADDORA-switch): study protocol for a fully blinded randomised superiority test-treatment trial

Contains fulltext : 235079.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access

Residual disease activity and treatment adjustments in psoriatic arthritis in current clinical practice

Abstract Background With expanding therapeutic possibilities for treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) it will be increasingly important to determine residual disease and define when to adjust treatment. The rationale behind treatment decisions in current daily clinical practice and the relationship with residual disease activity has not been investigated. The aim of this study was to assess current clinical practice on defining residual disease and subsequent treatment decisions made in PsA patients. Methods This cross-sectional study scored disease activity and treatment decisions prospectively in 142 consecutive PsA patients visiting the outpatient clinic for routine follow up. Disease activity parameters were scored by patient and the treating rheumatologist; the rheumatologist additionally registered his opinion on the presence of remaining disease activity despite current treatment (further mentioned as remaining disease) and subsequent treatment decisions. Results Two thirds (90/142) of patients had remaining disease activity according to the treating rheumatologist. Almost half (46%) of these patients had moderate to high disease activity according to the clinical Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (cDAPSA). Residual disease activity was determined by joint disease and pain rather than by active psoriasis. Demographic and clinical features were similar between groups with or without residual disease. Among patients with remaining disease activity, 74% were treated with either a conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (csDMARD) only or a first TNF-inhibiting biological agent, suggesting opportunities for treatment modification. However, treatment adjustment was initiated in only 21 (23%) of the 90 patients with residual disease. When comparing patients with remaining disease activity with and without treatment adjustment, we found no differences in objective disease activity measures, such as joint counts and patient scores. These data suggest that treatment is not adjusted in a large majority of patients with residual disease activity, although options for treatment changes are available. Conclusions Remaining disease activity is present in almost two thirds of patients with PsA when scored by the treating rheumatologist, but triggers treatment adjustment in only a minority. Further research to understand why disease activity does not lead to treatment adjustment is required to enable implementation of treatment strategies in clinical practice

Using adalimumab serum concentration to choose a subsequent biological DMARD in rheumatoid arthritis patients failing adalimumab treatment (ADDORA-switch): study protocol for a fully blinded randomised superiority test-treatment trial

Background: A substantial proportion of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients discontinues treatment with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) due to inefficacy or intolerance. After the failure of treatment with a TNFi, treatment can be switched to another TNFi or a bDMARD with a different mode of action (non-TNFi). Measurement of serum drug concentrations and/or anti-drug antibodies (therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM)) may help to inform the choice for the next step. However, the clinical utility of TDM to guide switching has not been investigated in a randomised test-treatment study. Methods: ADDORA-switch is a 24-week, multi-centre, triple-blinded, superiority test-treatment randomised controlled trial. A total of 84 RA patients failing adalimumab treatment (treatment failure defined as DAS28-CRP > 2.9) will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to a switching strategy to either TNFi or non-TNFi based on adalimumab serum trough level (intervention group) or random allocation (control group). The primary outcome is the between-group difference in mean time-weighted DAS28 over 24 weeks. Discussion: The trial design differs in many aspects from previously published and ongoing TDM studies and is considered the first blinded test-treatment trial using TDM in RA. Several choices in the design of this trial are described, and overarching principles regarding test-treatment trials and clinical utility of TDM are discussed in further detail. Trial registration: Dutch Trial Register NL8210. Registered on 3 December 2019 (CMO NL69841.091.19)

Using adalimumab serum concentration to choose a subsequent biological DMARD in rheumatoid arthritis patients failing adalimumab treatment (ADDORA-switch): study protocol for a fully blinded randomised superiority test-treatment trial

Background: A substantial proportion of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients discontinues treatment with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) due to inefficacy or intolerance. After the failure of treatment with a TNFi, treatment can be switched to another TNFi or a bDMARD with a different mode of action (non-TNFi). Measurement of serum drug concentrations and/or anti-drug antibodies (therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM)) may help to inform the choice for the next step. However, the clinical utility of TDM to guide switching has not been investigated in a randomised test-treatment study. Methods: ADDORA-switch is a 24-week, multi-centre, triple-blinded, superiority test-treatment randomised controlled trial. A total of 84 RA patients failing adalimumab treatment (treatment failure defined as DAS28-CRP > 2.9) will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to a switching strategy to either TNFi or non-TNFi based on adalimumab serum trough level (intervention group) or random allocation (control group). The primary outcome is the between-group difference in mean time-weighted DAS28 over 24 weeks. Discussion: The trial design differs in many aspects from previously published and ongoing TDM studies and is considered the first blinded test-treatment trial using TDM in RA. Several choices in the design of this trial are described, and overarching principles regarding test-treatment trials and clinical utility of TDM are discussed in further detail. Trial registration: Dutch Trial Register NL8210. Registered on 3 December 2019 (CMO NL69841.091.19)

Using adalimumab serum concentration to choose a subsequent biological DMARD in rheumatoid arthritis patients failing adalimumab treatment (ADDORA-switch): study protocol for a fully blinded randomised superiority test-treatment trial

Abstract Background A substantial proportion of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients discontinues treatment with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) due to inefficacy or intolerance. After the failure of treatment with a TNFi, treatment can be switched to another TNFi or a bDMARD with a different mode of action (non-TNFi). Measurement of serum drug concentrations and/or anti-drug antibodies (therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM)) may help to inform the choice for the next step. However, the clinical utility of TDM to guide switching has not been investigated in a randomised test-treatment study. Methods ADDORA-switch is a 24-week, multi-centre, triple-blinded, superiority test-treatment randomised controlled trial. A total of 84 RA patients failing adalimumab treatment (treatment failure defined as DAS28-CRP > 2.9) will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to a switching strategy to either TNFi or non-TNFi based on adalimumab serum trough level (intervention group) or random allocation (control group). The primary outcome is the between-group difference in mean time-weighted DAS28 over 24 weeks. Discussion The trial design differs in many aspects from previously published and ongoing TDM studies and is considered the first blinded test-treatment trial using TDM in RA. Several choices in the design of this trial are described, and overarching principles regarding test-treatment trials and clinical utility of TDM are discussed in further detail. Trial registration Dutch Trial Register NL8210 . Registered on 3 December 2019 (CMO NL69841.091.19)

Using adalimumab serum concentration to choose a subsequent biological DMARD in rheumatoid arthritis patients failing adalimumab treatment (ADDORA-switch): study protocol for a fully blinded randomised superiority test-treatment trial

Background: A substantial proportion of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients discontinues treatment with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) due to inefficacy or intolerance. After the failure of treatment with a TNFi, treatment can be switched to another TNFi or a bDMARD with a different mode of action (non-TNFi). Measurement of serum drug concentrations and/or anti-drug antibodies (therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM)) may help to inform the choice for the next step. However, the clinical utility of TDM to guide switching has not been investigated in a randomised test-treatment study. Methods: ADDORA-switch is a 24-week, multi-centre, triple-blinded, superiority test-treatment randomised controlled trial. A total of 84 RA patients failing adalimumab treatment (treatment failure defined as DAS28-CRP > 2.9) will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to a switching strategy to either TNFi or non-TNFi based on adalimumab serum trough level (intervention group) or random allocation (control group). The primary outcome is the between-group difference in mean time-weighted DAS28 over 24 weeks. Discussion: The trial design differs in many aspects from previously published and ongoing TDM studies and is considered the first blinded test-treatment trial using TDM in RA. Several choices in the design of this trial are described, and overarching principles regarding test-treatment trials and clinical utility of TDM are discussed in further detail. Trial registration: Dutch Trial Register NL8210. Registered on 3 December 2019 (CMO NL69841.091.19)

Post-COVID condition in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases:a prospective cohort study in the Netherlands

Background: Studies on long-term consequences of COVID-19, commonly referred to as post-COVID condition, in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases are scarce and inconclusive. Furthermore, classifying patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases as having post-COVID condition is complicated because of overlapping symptoms. Therefore, we investigated the risk of post-COVID condition and time until recovery, and compared the prevalence of symptoms seen in post-COVID condition, between patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases and healthy controls, with and without a history of COVID-19. Methods: In this substudy we used data from an ongoing prospective cohort study in the Netherlands. All adult patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases from the Amsterdam Rheumatology and Immunology Center in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, were invited to participate in the study between April 26, 2020, and March 1, 2021. All patients were asked, but not obliged, to recruit their own control participant of the same sex, of comparable age (< 5 years), and without an inflammatory rheumatic disease. Demographic and clinical data, including data on the occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 infections, were collected via online questionnaires. On March 10, 2022, all study participants received a questionnaire on the occurrence, onset, severity, and duration of persistent symptoms during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic, independent of their history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Additionally, we prospectively monitored a subset of participants who had a PCR or antigen confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the 2-month period surrounding the questionnaire in order to assess COVID-19 sequelae. In line with WHO guidelines, post-COVID condition was defined as persistent symptoms that lasted at least 8 weeks, started after the onset and within 3 months of a PCR or antigen-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, and could not be explained by an alternative diagnosis. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, logistic regression analyses, logistic-based causal mediation analyses, and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses for time until recovery from post-COVID condition. In exploratory analyses, E-values were calculated to investigate unmeasured confounding. Findings: A total of 1974 patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease (1268 [64%] women and 706 [36%] men; mean age 59 years [SD 13]) and 733 healthy controls (495 [68%] women and 238 [32%] men; mean age 59 years [12]) participated. 468 (24%) of 1974 patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease and 218 (30%) of 733 healthy controls had a recent SARS-CoV-2 omicron infection. Of those, 365 (78%) of 468 patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease and 172 (79%) of 218 healthy controls completed the prospective follow-up COVID-19 sequelae questionnaires. More patients than controls fulfilled post-COVID condition criteria: 77 (21%) of 365 versus 23 (13%) of 172 (odds ratio [OR] 1·73 [95% CI 1·04–2·87]; p=0·033). The OR was attenuated after adjusting for potential confounders (adjusted OR 1·53 [95% CI 0·90–2·59]; p=0·12). Among those without a history of COVID-19, patients with inflammatory diseases were more likely to report persistent symptoms consistent with post-COVID condition than were healthy controls (OR 2·52 [95% CI 1·92–3·32]; p<0·0001). This OR exceeded the calculated E-values of 1·74 and 1·96. Recovery time from post-COVID condition was similar for patients and controls (p=0·17). Fatigue and loss of fitness were the most frequently reported symptoms in both patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease and healthy controls with post-COVID condition. Interpretation: Post-COVID condition after SARS-CoV-2 omicron infections was higher in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease than in healthy controls based on WHO classification guidelines. However, because more patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease than healthy controls without a history of COVID-19 reported symptoms that are commonly used to define a post-COVID condition during the first 2 years of the pandemic, it is likely that the observed difference in post-COVID condition between patients and controls might in part be explained by clinical manifestations in the context of underlying rheumatic diseases. This highlights the limitations of applying current criteria for post-COVID condition in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease, and suggests it might be appropriate for physicians to keep a nuanced attitude when communicating the long-term consequences of COVID-19. Funding: ZonMw (the Netherlands organization for Health Research and Development) and Reade foundation