4 research outputs found

    Rituximab versus tocilizumab in rheumatoid arthritis: synovial biopsy-based biomarker analysis of the phase 4 r4ra randomized trial

    Get PDF
    Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receive highly targeted biologic therapies without previous knowledge of target expression levels in the diseased tissue. Approximately 40% of patients do not respond to individual biologic therapies and 5–20% are refractory to all. In a biopsy-based, precision-medicine, randomized clinical trial in RA (R4RA; n = 164), patients with low/absent synovial B cell molecular signature had a lower response to rituximab (anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody) compared with that to tocilizumab (anti-IL6R monoclonal antibody) although the exact mechanisms of response/nonresponse remain to be established. Here, in-depth histological/molecular analyses of R4RA synovial biopsies identify humoral immune response gene signatures associated with response to rituximab and tocilizumab, and a stromal/fibroblast signature in patients refractory to all medications. Post-treatment changes in synovial gene expression and cell infiltration highlighted divergent effects of rituximab and tocilizumab relating to differing response/nonresponse mechanisms. Using ten-by-tenfold nested cross-validation, we developed machine learning algorithms predictive of response to rituximab (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.74), tocilizumab (AUC = 0.68) and, notably, multidrug resistance (AUC = 0.69). This study supports the notion that disease endotypes, driven by diverse molecular pathology pathways in the diseased tissue, determine diverse clinical and treatment–response phenotypes. It also highlights the importance of integration of molecular pathology signatures into clinical algorithms to optimize the future use of existing medications and inform the development of new drugs for refractory patients

    Three decades of low-dose methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis: Can we predict toxicity?

    No full text

    Fast Track Algorithm: How To Differentiate A “Scleroderma Pattern” From A “Non-Scleroderma Pattern”

    Get PDF
    Objectives: This study was designed to propose a simple “Fast Track algorithm” for capillaroscopists of any level of experience to differentiate “scleroderma patterns” from “non-scleroderma patterns” on capillaroscopy and to assess its inter-rater reliability. Methods: Based on existing definitions to categorise capillaroscopic images as “scleroderma patterns” and taking into account the real life variability of capillaroscopic images described standardly according to the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Study Group on Microcirculation in Rheumatic Diseases, a fast track decision tree, the “Fast Track algorithm” was created by the principal expert (VS) to facilitate swift categorisation of an image as “non-scleroderma pattern (category 1)” or “scleroderma pattern (category 2)”. Mean inter-rater reliability between all raters (experts/attendees) of the 8th EULAR course on capillaroscopy in Rheumatic Diseases (Genoa, 2018) and, as external validation, of the 8th European Scleroderma Trials and Research group (EUSTAR) course on systemic sclerosis (SSc) (Nijmegen, 2019) versus the principal expert, as well as reliability between the rater pairs themselves was assessed by mean Cohen's and Light's kappa coefficients. Results: Mean Cohen's kappa was 1/0.96 (95% CI 0.95-0.98) for the 6 experts/135 attendees of the 8th EULAR capillaroscopy course and 1/0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.96) for the 3 experts/85 attendees of the 8th EUSTAR SSc course. Light's kappa was 1/0.92 at the 8th EULAR capillaroscopy course, and 1/0.87 at the 8th EUSTAR SSc course. C Conclusion: For the first time, a clinical expert based fast track decision algorithm has been developed to differentiate a “non-scleroderma” from a “scleroderma pattern” on capillaroscopic images, demonstrating excellent reliability when applied by capillaroscopists with varying levels of expertise versus the principal expert and corroborated with external validation.Wo
    corecore