21 research outputs found

    Immunogenicity of TNF-Inhibitors

    No full text
    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

    Creatine kinase and blood pressure in women with a history of early-onset preeclampsia

    No full text
    OBJECTIVES: High plasma creatine kinase (CK) activity is associated with hypertension in the general and pregnant population. We hypothesize that women with a history of early-onset preeclampsia are prone to hypertension due to a high CK activity level. STUDY DESIGN: Nine to 16 years after pregnancy, serum CK activity and blood pressure were measured in 117 women with a history of early-onset preeclampsia and 50 women with a history of an uncomplicated pregnancy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: CK activity levels of the two groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. The association between CK activity and blood pressure was evaluated by means of multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in median (interquartile range) CK activity between women with a history of early-onset preeclampsia and an uncomplicated pregnancy (59.00 [47.00-85.00] vs. 58.00 [46.50-75.25], respectively, p = 0.774). The association between CK and systolic blood pressure was significant in women with a pregnancy history of early-onset preeclampsia (regression coefficient [95% confidence interval]: 0.123 mmHg [0.020-0.226], p = 0.019), and a trend was found for diastolic blood pressure (p = 0.069). CK and blood pressure were not significantly associated in women with a history of an uncomplicated pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Median CK did not significantly differ between the two groups. Serum CK activity was significantly associated with systolic blood pressure in women with a history of early-onset preeclampsia. These data suggest that CK is not a predominant factor in the increased risk of hypertension in women with a history of early-onset preeclampsia

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

    No full text
    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
    corecore