Response to Biologic Drugs in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Antidrug Antibodies

Importance: There are conflicting data on the association of antidrug antibodies with response to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Objective: To analyze the association of antidrug antibodies with response to treatment for RA. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed data from the ABI-RA (Anti-Biopharmaceutical Immunization: Prediction and Analysis of Clinical Relevance to Minimize the Risk of Immunization in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients) multicentric, open, prospective study of patients with RA from 27 recruiting centers in 4 European countries (France, Italy, the Netherlands, and the UK). Eligible patients were 18 years or older, had RA diagnosis, and were initiating a new bDMARD. Recruitment spanned from March 3, 2014, to June 21, 2016. The study was completed in June 2018, and data were analyzed in June 2022. Exposures: Patients were treated with a new bDMARD: adalimumab, infliximab (grouped as anti-tumor necrosis factor [TNF] monoclonal antibodies [mAbs]), etanercept, tocilizumab, and rituximab according to the choice of the treating physician. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the association of antidrug antibody positivity with EULAR (European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology; formerly, European League Against Rheumatism) response to treatment at month 12 assessed through univariate logistic regression. The secondary end points were the EULAR response at month 6 and at visits from month 6 to months 15 to 18 using generalized estimating equation models. Detection of antidrug antibody serum levels was performed at months 1, 3, 6, 12, and 15 to 18 using electrochemiluminescence (Meso Scale Discovery) and drug concentration for anti-TNF mAbs, and etanercept in the serum was measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Results: Of the 254 patients recruited, 230 (mean [SD] age, 54.3 [13.7] years; 177 females [77.0%]) were analyzed. At month 12, antidrug antibody positivity was 38.2% in patients who were treated with anti-TNF mAbs, 6.1% with etanercept, 50.0% with rituximab, and 20.0% with tocilizumab. There was an inverse association between antidrug antibody positivity (odds ratio [OR], 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09-0.38; P <.001) directed against all biologic drugs and EULAR response at month 12. Analyzing all the visits starting at month 6 using generalized estimating equation models confirmed the inverse association between antidrug antibody positivity and EULAR response (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.18-0.65; P <.001). A similar association was found for tocilizumab alone (OR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.04-0.83; P =.03). In the multivariable analysis, antidrug antibodies, body mass index, and rheumatoid factor were independently inversely associated with response to treatment. There was a significantly higher drug concentration of anti-TNF mAbs in patients with antidrug antibody-negative vs antidrug antibody-positive status (mean difference, -9.6 [95% CI, -12.4 to -6.9] mg/L; P < 001). Drug concentrations of etanercept (mean difference, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.2-1.2] mg/L; P =.005) and adalimumab (mean difference, 1.8 [95% CI, 0.4-3.2] mg/L; P =.01) were lower in nonresponders vs responders. Methotrexate comedication at baseline was inversely associated with antidrug antibodies (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.25-1.00; P =.05). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this prospective cohort study suggest an association between antidrug antibodies and nonresponse to bDMARDs in patients with RA. Monitoring antidrug antibodies could be considered in the treatment of these patients, particularly nonresponders to biologic RA drugs

Response to biologic drugs in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and antidrug antibodies

IMPORTANCE There are conflicting data on the association of antidrug antibodies with response tobiologic disease–modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).OBJECTIVE To analyze the association of antidrug antibodies with response to treatment for RA.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study analyzed data from the ABI-RA (Anti-Biopharmaceutical Immunization: Prediction and Analysis of Clinical Relevance to Minimize the Riskof Immunization in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients) multicentric, open, prospective study of patientswith RA from 27 recruiting centers in 4 European countries (France, Italy, the Netherlands, and theUK). Eligible patients were 18 years or older, had RA diagnosis, and were initiating a new bDMARD.Recruitment spanned from March 3, 2014, to June 21, 2016. The study was completed in June 2018,and data were analyzed in June 2022.EXPOSURES Patients were treated with a new bDMARD: adalimumab, infliximab (grouped as anti–tumor necrosis factor [TNF] monoclonal antibodies [mAbs]), etanercept, tocilizumab, and rituximabaccording to the choice of the treating physician.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was the association of antidrug antibodypositivity with EULAR (European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology; formerly, EuropeanLeague Against Rheumatism) response to treatment at month 12 assessed through univariate logisticregression. The secondary end points were the EULAR response at month 6 and at visits from month6 to months 15 to 18 using generalized estimating equation models. Detection of antidrug antibodyserum levels was performed at months 1, 3, 6, 12, and 15 to 18 using electrochemiluminescence (MesoScale Discovery) and drug concentration for anti-TNF mAbs, and etanercept in the serum wasmeasured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.RESULTS Of the 254 patients recruited, 230 (mean [SD] age, 54.3 [13.7] years; 177 females [77.0%])were analyzed. At month 12, antidrug antibody positivity was 38.2% in patients who were treatedwith anti-TNF mAbs, 6.1% with etanercept, 50.0% with rituximab, and 20.0% with tocilizumab.There was an inverse association between antidrug antibody positivity (odds ratio [OR], 0.19; 95% CI,0.09-0.38; P all the visits starting at month 6 using generalized estimating equation models confirmed the inverseassociation between antidrug antibody positivity and EULAR response (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.18-0.65;P P = .03). In the multivariable analysis, antidrug antibodies, body mass index, and rheumatoid factorwere independently inversely associated with response to treatment. There was a significantly higher drug concentration of anti-TNF mAbs in patients with antidrug antibody–negative vs antidrugantibody–positive status (mean difference, −9.6 [95% CI, −12.4 to −6.9] mg/L; P concentrations of etanercept (mean difference, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.2-1.2] mg/L; P = .005) andadalimumab (mean difference, 1.8 [95% CI, 0.4-3.2] mg/L; P = .01) were lower in nonresponders vsresponders. Methotrexate comedication at baseline was inversely associated with antidrugantibodies (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.25-1.00; P = .05).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Results of this prospective cohort study suggest an associationbetween antidrug antibodies and nonresponse to bDMARDs in patients with RA. Monitoring antidrugantibodies could be considered in the treatment of these patients, particularly nonresponders tobiologic RA drugs.Pathophysiology and treatment of rheumatic disease

Экспериментальное изучение влияния глюкозамина гидрохлорида на развитие патоспермии стареющих крыс, вызванной доксорубицином

ГЛЮКОЗАМИНА ГИДРОХЛОРИДДОКСОРУБИЦИНПАТОСПЕРМИЯСТАРЕНИЕФАРМАКОЛОГИЯ КЛИНИЧЕСКАЯЛЕКАРСТВ ФИЗИОЛОГИЧЕСКОЕ ДЕЙСТВИЕРЕПРОДУКЦИЮ КОНТРОЛИРУЮЩИЕ СРЕДСТВАЭКСПЕРИМЕНТЫ НА ЖИВОТНЫХКРЫСЫЦель работы - исследование влияния глюкозамина гидрохлорида на развитие гипофункции семенников крыс, вызванной длительным введением доксорубицина на фоне старения животных

Practical guidelines for rigor and reproducibility in preclinical and clinical studies on cardioprotection

The potential for ischemic preconditioning to reduce infarct size was first recognized more than 30 years ago. Despite extension of the concept to ischemic postconditioning and remote ischemic conditioning and literally thousands of experimental studies in various species and models which identified a multitude of signaling steps, so far there is only a single and very recent study, which has unequivocally translated cardioprotection to improved clinical outcome as the primary endpoint in patients. Many potential reasons for this disappointing lack of clinical translation of cardioprotection have been proposed, including lack of rigor and reproducibility in preclinical studies, and poor design and conduct of clinical trials. There is, however, universal agreement that robust preclinical data are a mandatory prerequisite to initiate a meaningful clinical trial. In this context, it is disconcerting that the CAESAR consortium (Consortium for preclinicAl assESsment of cARdioprotective therapies) in a highly standardized multi-center approach of preclinical studies identified only ischemic preconditioning, but not nitrite or sildenafil, when given as adjunct to reperfusion, to reduce infarct size. However, ischemic preconditioning—due to its very nature—can only be used in elective interventions, and not in acute myocardial infarction. Therefore, better strategies to identify robust and reproducible strategies of cardioprotection, which can subsequently be tested in clinical trials must be developed. We refer to the recent guidelines for experimental models of myocardial ischemia and infarction, and aim to provide now practical guidelines to ensure rigor and reproducibility in preclinical and clinical studies on cardioprotection. In line with the above guideline, we define rigor as standardized state-of-the-art design, conduct and reporting of a study, which is then a prerequisite for reproducibility, i.e. replication of results by another laboratory when performing exactly the same experiment

Serum infliximab concentrations and disease activity: a descriptive study of patients with psoriasis

International audienc

Relationship between rituximab concentration and autoantibody levels in anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody associated vasculitis

International audienc