Dramatic pain relief and resolution of bone inflammation following pamidronate in 9 pediatric patients with persistent chronic recurrent multifocal osteomyelitis (CRMO)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Chronic recurrent multifocal osteomyelitis (CRMO) is an inflammatory, non-infectious osteopathy that affects predominantly patients ≤ 18 years of age. There is no uniformly effective treatment. Our objective is to describe clinical, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and bone resorption response to intravenous pamidronate in pediatric CRMO.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We report our prospectively documented experience with all CRMO patients treated with pamidronate between 2003 and 2008 at a tertiary pediatric centre. Pamidronate was administered as intravenous cycles. The dose of pamidronate varied among subjects but was given as monthly to every 3 monthly cycles depending on the distance the patient lived from the infusion center. Maximum cumulative dose was ≤ 11.5 mg/kg/year. Pamidronate treatment was continued until resolution of MRI documented bone inflammation. Visual analog scale for pain (VAS) and bone resorption marker urine N-telopeptide/urine creatinine (uNTX/uCr) were measured at baseline, preceding each subsequent pamidronate treatment, at final follow-up, and/or at time of MRI confirmed CRMO flare. MRI of the affected site(s) was obtained at baseline, preceding every 2^ndtreatment, and with suspected CRMO recurrence.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Nine patients (5 F: 4 M) were treated, with a median (range) age at treatment of 12.9 (4.5–16.3) years, and median (range) duration of symptoms of 18 (6–36) months. VAS decreased from 10/10 to 0–3/10 by the end of first 3–day treatment for all patients. The mean (range) time to complete MRI resolution of bone inflammation was 6.0 (2–12) months. The mean (confidence interval (CI)) baseline uNTX/uCr was 738.83 (CI 464.25, 1013.42)nmol/mmol/creatinine and the mean (CI) decrease from baseline to pamidronate discontinuation was 522.17 (CI 299.77, 744.56)nmol/mmol/creatinine. Median (range) of follow-up was 31.4 (24–54) months. Four patients had MRI confirmed CRMO recurrence, which responded to one pamidronate re-treatment. The mean (range) uNTX/uCr change as a monthly rate from the time of pamidronate discontinuation to flare was 9.41 (1.38–19.85)nmol/mmol/creatinine compared to -29.88 (-96.83–2.01)nmol/mmol/creatinine for patients who did not flare by the time of final follow-up.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Pamidronate resulted in resolution of pain and MRI documented inflammation in all patients. No patient flared while his/her uNTX/uCr remained suppressed. We propose that pamidronate is an effective second-line therapy in persistent CRMO.</p

DAS-28-based EULAR response and HAQ improvement in rheumatoid arthritis patients switching between TNF antagonists

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>No definitive data are available regarding the value of switching to an alternative TNF antagonist in rheumatoid arthritis patients who fail to respond to the first one. The aim of this study was to evaluate treatment response in a clinical setting based on HAQ improvement and EULAR response criteria in RA patients who were switched to a second or a third TNF antagonist due to failure with the first one.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This was an observational, prospective study of a cohort of 417 RA patients treated with TNF antagonists in three university hospitals in Spain between January 1999 and December 2005. A database was created at the participating centres, with well-defined operational instructions. The main outcome variables were analyzed using parametric or non-parametric tests depending on the level of measurement and distribution of each variable.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Mean (± SD) DAS-28 on starting the first, second and third TNF antagonist was 5.9 (± 2.0), 5.1 (± 1.5) and 6.1 (± 1.1). At the end of follow-up, it decreased to 3.3 (± 1.6; Δ = -2.6; p > 0.0001), 4.2 (± 1.5; Δ = -1.1; p = 0.0001) and 5.4 (± 1.7; Δ = -0.7; p = 0.06). For the first TNF antagonist, DAS-28-based EULAR response level was good in 42% and moderate in 33% of patients. The second TNF antagonist yielded a good response in 20% and no response in 53% of patients, while the third one yielded a good response in 28% and no response in 72%. Mean baseline HAQ on starting the first, second and third TNF antagonist was 1.61, 1.52 and 1.87, respectively. At the end of follow-up, it decreased to 1.12 (Δ = -0.49; p < 0.0001), 1.31 (Δ = -0.21, p = 0.004) and 1.75 (Δ = -0.12; p = 0.1), respectively. Sixty four percent of patients had a clinically important improvement in HAQ (defined as ≥ -0.22) with the first TNF antagonist and 46% with the second.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>A clinically significant effect size was seen in less than half of RA patients cycling to a second TNF antagonist.</p

Rituximab versus an alternative TNF inhibitor in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who failed to respond to a single previous TNF inhibitor: SWITCH-RA, a global, observational, comparative effectiveness study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of rituximab versus an alternative tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor (TNFi) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to one previous TNFi. METHODS: SWITCH-RA was a prospective, global, observational, real-life study. Patients non-responsive or intolerant to a single TNFi were enrolled ≤4 weeks after starting rituximab or a second TNFi. Primary end point: change in Disease Activity Score in 28 joints excluding patient's global health component (DAS28-3)-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) over 6 months. RESULTS: 604 patients received rituximab, and 507 an alternative TNFi as second biological therapy. Reasons for discontinuing the first TNFi were inefficacy (n=827), intolerance (n=263) and other (n=21). A total of 728 patients were available for primary end point analysis (rituximab n=405; TNFi n=323). Baseline mean (SD) DAS28-3-ESR was higher in the rituximab than the TNFi group: 5.2 (1.2) vs 4.8 (1.3); p<0.0001. Least squares mean (SE) change in DAS28-3-ESR at 6 months was significantly greater in rituximab than TNFi patients: -1.5 (0.2) vs -1.1 (0.2); p=0.007. The difference remained significant among patients discontinuing the initial TNFi because of inefficacy (-1.7 vs -1.3; p=0.017) but not intolerance (-0.7 vs -0.7; p=0.894). Seropositive patients showed significantly greater improvements in DAS28-3-ESR with rituximab than with TNFi (-1.6 (0.3) vs -1.2 (0.3); p=0.011), particularly those switching because of inefficacy (-1.9 (0.3) vs -1.5 (0.4); p=0.021). The overall incidence of adverse events was similar between the rituximab and TNFi groups. CONCLUSIONS: These real-life data indicate that, after discontinuation of an initial TNFi, switching to rituximab is associated with significantly improved clinical effectiveness compared with switching to a second TNFi. This difference was particularly evident in seropositive patients and in those switched because of inefficacy

Subcutaneous abatacept in patients with polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis : results from a phase III open-label study

OBJECTIVE : To investigate the pharmacokinetics, effectiveness, and safety of subcutaneous (SC) abatacept treatment over 24 months in patients with polyarticular‐course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). METHODS: In this phase III, open‐label, international, multicenter, single‐arm study, patients with polyarticular JIA (cohort 1, ages 6–17 years and cohort 2, ages 2–5 years) in whom treatment with ≥1 disease‐modifying antirheumatic drug was unsuccessful received weight‐tiered SC abatacept weekly: 10 to <25 kg (50 mg), 25 to <50 kg (87.5 mg), ≥50 kg (125 mg). Patients who had met the JIA–American College of Rheumatology 30% improvement criteria (achieved a JIA‐ACR 30 response) at month 4 were given the option to continue SC abatacept to month 24. The primary end point was the abatacept steady‐state serum trough concentration (Cminss) in cohort 1 at month 4. Other outcome measures included JIA‐ACR 30, 50, 70, 90, 100, and inactive disease status, the median Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score in 71 joints using the C‐reactive protein level (JADAS‐71–CRP) over time, safety, and immunogenicity. RESULTS : The median abatacept Cminss at month 4 (primary end point) and at month 24 was above the target therapeutic exposure (10 μg/ml) in both cohorts. The percentage of patients who had achieved JIA‐ACR 30, 50, 70, 90, or 100 responses or had inactive disease responses at month 4 (intent‐to‐treat population) was 83.2%, 72.8%, 52.6%, 28.3%, 14.5%, and 30.1%, respectively, in cohort 1 (n = 173) and 89.1%, 84.8%, 73.9%, 58.7%, 41.3%, and 50.0%, respectively, in cohort 2 (n = 46); the responses were maintained to month 24. The median (interquartile range) JADAS‐71–CRP improved from baseline to month 4: cohort 1, from 21.0 (13.5, 30.3) to 4.6 (2.1, 9.4); cohort 2, from 18.1 (14.0, 23.1) to 2.1 (0.3, 4.4). Improvements were sustained to month 24, at which time 27 of 173 patients (cohort 1) and 11 of 22 patients (cohort 2) had achieved JADAS‐71–CRP remission. No unexpected adverse events were reported; 4 of 172 patients (2.3%) in cohort 1 and 4 of 46 (8.7%) in cohort 2 developed anti‐abatacept antibodies, with no clinical effects. CONCLUSION : Weight‐stratified SC abatacept yielded target therapeutic exposures across age and weight groups, was well tolerated, and improved polyarticular JIA symptoms over 24 months.Results From a Phase III Open‐Label StudyWriting assistance was funded by Bristol‐Myers Squibb.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/23265205am2018Internal Medicin