Efficacy and safety of epratuzumab in patients with moderate/severe active systemic lupus erythematosus: results from EMBLEM, a phase IIb, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study

Objective: To identify a suitable dosing regimen of the CD22-targeted monoclonal antibody epratuzumab in adults with moderately to severely active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods: A phase IIb, multicentre, randomised controlled study (NCT00624351) was conducted with 227 patients (37–39 per arm) receiving either: placebo, epratuzumab 200 mg cumulative dose (cd) (100 mg every other week (EOW)), 800 mg cd (400 mg EOW), 2400 mg cd (600 mg weekly), 2400 mg cd (1200 mg EOW), or 3600 mg cd (1800 mg EOW). The primary endpoint (not powered for significance) was the week 12 responder rate measured using a novel composite endpoint, the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG)-based Combined Lupus Assessment (BICLA). Results: Proportion of responders was higher in all epratuzumab groups than with placebo (overall treatment effect test p=0.148). Exploratory pairwise analysis demonstrated clinical improvement in patients receiving a cd of 2400 mg epratuzumab (OR for 600 mg weekly vs placebo: 3.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 8.8), nominal p=0.03; OR for 1200 mg EOW vs placebo: 2.6 (0.9 to 7.1), nominal p=0.07). Post-hoc comparison of all 2400 mg cd patients versus placebo found an overall treatment effect (OR=2.9 (1.2 to 7.1), nominal p=0.02). Incidence of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs and infusion reactions was similar between epratuzumab and placebo groups, without decreases in immunoglobulin levels and only partial reduction in B-cell levels. Conclusions: Treatment with epratuzumab 2400 mg cd was well tolerated in patients with moderately to severely active SLE, and associated with improvements in disease activity. Phase III studies are ongoing

Joint European League Against Rheumatism and European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (EULAR/ERA-EDTA) recommendations for the management of adult and paediatric lupus nephritis.

OBJECTIVES: To develop recommendations for the management of adult and paediatric lupus nephritis (LN). METHODS: The available evidence was systematically reviewed using the PubMed database. A modified Delphi method was used to compile questions, elicit expert opinions and reach consensus. RESULTS: Immunosuppressive treatment should be guided by renal biopsy, and aiming for complete renal response (proteinuria <0.5 g/24 h with normal or near-normal renal function). Hydroxychloroquine is recommended for all patients with LN. Because of a more favourable efficacy/toxicity ratio, as initial treatment for patients with class III-IV(A) or (A/C) (±V) LN according to the International Society of Nephrology/Renal Pathology Society 2003 classification, mycophenolic acid (MPA) or low-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide (CY) in combination with glucocorticoids is recommended. In patients with adverse clinical or histological features, CY can be prescribed at higher doses, while azathioprine is an alternative for milder cases. For pure class V LN with nephrotic-range proteinuria, MPA in combination with oral glucocorticoids is recommended as initial treatment. In patients improving after initial treatment, subsequent immunosuppression with MPA or azathioprine is recommended for at least 3 years; in such cases, initial treatment with MPA should be followed by MPA. For MPA or CY failures, switching to the other agent, or to rituximab, is the suggested course of action. In anticipation of pregnancy, patients should be switched to appropriate medications without reducing the intensity of treatment. There is no evidence to suggest that management of LN should differ in children versus adults. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations for the management of LN were developed using an evidence-based approach followed by expert consensus

Off-label use of rituximab for systemic lupus erythematosus in Europe

K

Off-label use of rituximab for systemic lupus erythematosus in Europe

Objectives: Rituximab (RTX) is a biological treatment used off-label in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). This survey aimed to investigate the off-label use of RTX in Europe and compare the characteristics of patients receiving RTX with those receiving conventional therapy. Methods: Data on patients with SLE receiving RTX were taken from the International Registry for Biologics in SLE retrospective registry and complemented with data on patients with SLE treated with conventional therapy. For nationwide estimates of RTX use in patients with SLE, investigators were asked to provide data through case report forms (CRFs). Countries for which no data were submitted through CRFs, published literature and/or personal communication were used, and for European countries where no data were available, estimates were made on the assumption of similarities with neighbouring countries. Results: The estimated off-label use of RTX in Europe was 0.5%-1.5% of all patients with SLE. In comparison with patients with SLE on conventional therapy, patients treated with RTX had longer disease duration, higher disease activity and were more often treated with immunosuppressives. The most frequent organ manifestations for which either RTX or conventional therapy was initiated were lupus nephritis followed by musculoskeletal and haematological. The reason for treatment was, besides disease control, corticosteroid-sparing for patients treated with conventional therapy. Conclusions: RTX use for SLE in Europe is restrictive and appears to be used as a last resort in patients for whom other reasonable options have been exhausted

Phase II randomised trial of type I interferon inhibitor anifrolumab in patients with active lupus nephritis

Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of the type I interferon receptor antibody, anifrolumab, in patients with active, biopsy-proven, Class III/IV lupus nephritis. Methods This phase II double-blinded study randomised 147 patients (1:1:1) to receive monthly intravenous anifrolumab basic regimen (BR, 300 mg), intensified regimen (IR, 900 mg ×3, 300 mg thereafter) or placebo, alongside standard therapy (oral glucocorticoids, mycophenolate mofetil). The primary endpoint was change in baseline 24-hour urine protein–creatinine ratio (UPCR) at week (W) 52 for combined anifrolumab versus placebo groups. The secondary endpoint was complete renal response (CRR) at W52. Exploratory endpoints included more stringent CRR definitions and sustained glucocorticoid reductions (≤7.5 mg/day, W24–52). Safety was analysed descriptively. Results Patients received anifrolumab BR (n=45), IR (n=51), or placebo (n=49). At W52, 24-hour UPCR improved by 69% and 70% for combined anifrolumab and placebo groups, respectively (geometric mean ratio=1.03; 95% CI 0.62 to 1.71; p=0.905). Serum concentrations were higher with anifrolumab IR versus anifrolumab BR, which provided suboptimal exposure. Numerically more patients treated with anifrolumab IR vs placebo attained CRR (45.5% vs 31.1%), CRR with UPCR ≤0.5 mg/mg (40.9% vs 26.7%), CRR with inactive urinary sediment (40.9% vs 13.3%) and sustained glucocorticoid reductions (55.6% vs 33.3%). Incidence of herpes zoster was higher with combined anifrolumab vs placebo (16.7% vs 8.2%). Incidence of serious adverse events was similar across groups. Conclusion Although the primary endpoint was not met, anifrolumab IR was associated with numerical improvements over placebo across endpoints, including CRR, in patients with active lupus nephritis

Off-label use of rituximab for systemic lupus erythematosus in Europe

OBJECTIVES: Rituximab (RTX) is a biological treatment used off-label in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). This survey aimed to investigate the off-label use of RTX in Europe and compare the characteristics of patients receiving RTX with those receiving conventional therapy. METHODS: Data on patients with SLE receiving RTX were taken from the International Registry for Biologics in SLE retrospective registry and complemented with data on patients with SLE treated with conventional therapy. For nationwide estimates of RTX use in patients with SLE, investigators were asked to provide data through case report forms (CRFs). Countries for which no data were submitted through CRFs, published literature and/or personal communication were used, and for European countries where no data were available, estimates were made on the assumption of similarities with neighbouring countries. RESULTS: The estimated off-label use of RTX in Europe was 0.5%-1.5% of all patients with SLE. In comparison with patients with SLE on conventional therapy, patients treated with RTX had longer disease duration, higher disease activity and were more often treated with immunosuppressives. The most frequent organ manifestations for which either RTX or conventional therapy was initiated were lupus nephritis followed by musculoskeletal and haematological. The reason for treatment was, besides disease control, corticosteroid-sparing for patients treated with conventional therapy. CONCLUSIONS: RTX use for SLE in Europe is restrictive and appears to be used as a last resort in patients for whom other reasonable options have been exhausted

Joint European League Against Rheumatism and European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (EULAR/ERA-EDTA) recommendations for the management of adult and paediatric lupus nephritis.

OBJECTIVES: To develop recommendations for the management of adult and paediatric lupus nephritis (LN). METHODS: The available evidence was systematically reviewed using the PubMed database. A modified Delphi method was used to compile questions, elicit expert opinions and reach consensus. RESULTS: Immunosuppressive treatment should be guided by renal biopsy, and aiming for complete renal response (proteinuria <0.5 g/24 h with normal or near-normal renal function). Hydroxychloroquine is recommended for all patients with LN. Because of a more favourable efficacy/toxicity ratio, as initial treatment for patients with class III-IV(A) or (A/C) (±V) LN according to the International Society of Nephrology/Renal Pathology Society 2003 classification, mycophenolic acid (MPA) or low-dose intravenous cyclophosphamide (CY) in combination with glucocorticoids is recommended. In patients with adverse clinical or histological features, CY can be prescribed at higher doses, while azathioprine is an alternative for milder cases. For pure class V LN with nephrotic-range proteinuria, MPA in combination with oral glucocorticoids is recommended as initial treatment. In patients improving after initial treatment, subsequent immunosuppression with MPA or azathioprine is recommended for at least 3 years; in such cases, initial treatment with MPA should be followed by MPA. For MPA or CY failures, switching to the other agent, or to rituximab, is the suggested course of action. In anticipation of pregnancy, patients should be switched to appropriate medications without reducing the intensity of treatment. There is no evidence to suggest that management of LN should differ in children versus adults. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations for the management of LN were developed using an evidence-based approach followed by expert consensus

Low-dose aspirin vs low-dose aspirin plus low-intensity warfarin in thromboprophylaxis:a prospective, multicentre, randomized, open, controlled trial in patients positive for antiphospholipid antibodies (ALIWAPAS)

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study are to examine the efficacy and safety of low-dose aspirin (LDA) vs LDA plus low-intensity warfarin (LDA + W) in the primary thrombosis prevention of aPL-positive patients with SLE and/or obstetric morbidity and the role of clinical and serological markers in the development of thrombosis. METHODS: In this 5-year prospective, randomized, open, controlled trial, 166 patients with aPL were randomly assigned using a minimization protocol to receive treatment with LDA (n = 82) or LDA + W [international normalized ratio (INR) = 1.5] (n = 84). Sixty-six patients who declined randomization were followed up in an observational arm. Clinical and laboratory characteristics and medication side effects were recorded. RESULTS: There were no differences in the number of thromboses between patients treated with LDA (4/82) or LDA + W (4/84) [hazard ratio (HR) 1.07, 95% CI 0.27, 4.3]. The incidence of thrombosis in the randomized patients was 8/166 (1.8 events/100 person-years) (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.27, 4.3) and in the observational arm was 7/66 (4.9 events/100 person-years) (HR 2.43, 95% CI 0.87, 6.79). Sixty-five of 66 patients included in the observational arm received LDA. None of the examined clinical or serological factors appeared to predict thrombosis. Medication side effects included mild gastrointestinal symptoms in the LDA group (n = 2) and bleeding in the LDA + W group (n = 11; 1 nasal and 10 menorrhagia). The risk difference for bleeding was 13% (CI 6, 20). CONCLUSION: No differences in the number of thromboses were observed between patients treated with LDA vs those treated with LDA + W. More episodes of bleeding were detected in the LDA + W group. The LDA + W regime was significantly less safe and not as acceptable as LDA alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN81818945; http://isrctn.org/