John J. Cush

An interferon-inducible neutrophil-driven blood transcriptional signature in human tuberculosis

Tuberculosis (TB), caused by infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis, is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Efforts to control it are hampered by difficulties with diagnosis, prevention and treatment. Most people infected with M. tuberculosis remain asymptomatic, termed latent TB, with a 10% lifetime risk of developing active TB disease. Current tests, however, cannot identify which individuals will develop disease. The immune response to M. tuberculosis is complex and incompletely characterized, hindering development of new diagnostics, therapies and vaccines. Here we identify a whole-blood 393 transcript signature for active TB in intermediate and high-burden settings, correlating with radiological extent of disease and reverting to that of healthy controls after treatment. A subset of patients with latent TB had signatures similar to those in patients with active TB. We also identify a specific 86-transcript signature that discriminates active TB from other inflammatory and infectious diseases. Modular and pathway analysis revealed that the TB signature was dominated by a neutrophil-driven interferon (IFN)-inducible gene profile, consisting of both IFN-γ and type I IFN-αβ signalling. Comparison with transcriptional signatures in purified cells and flow cytometric analysis suggest that this TB signature reflects changes in cellular composition and altered gene expression. Although an IFN-inducible signature was also observed in whole blood of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), their complete modular signature differed from TB, with increased abundance of plasma cell transcripts. Our studies demonstrate a hitherto underappreciated role of type I IFN-αβ signalling in the pathogenesis of TB, which has implications for vaccine and therapeutic development. Our study also provides a broad range of transcriptional biomarkers with potential as diagnostic and prognostic tools to combat the TB epidemic.

Placebo-Controlled Trial of Tofacitinib Monotherapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis

BACKGROUND Tofacitinib (CP-690,550) is a novel oral Janus kinase inhibitor that is being investigated as a targeted immunomodulator and disease-modifying therapy for rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS In this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 6-month study, 611 patients were randomly assigned, in a 4:4:1:1 ratio, to 5 mg of tofacitinib twice daily, 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily, placebo for 3 months followed by 5 mg of tofacitinib twice daily, or placebo for 3 months followed by 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily. The primary end points, assessed at month 3, were the percentage of patients with at least a 20% improvement in the American College of Rheumatology scale (ACR 20), the change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) scores (which range from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating greater disability), and the percentage of patients with a Disease Activity Score for 28-joint counts based on the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-4[ESR]) of less than 2.6 (with scores ranging from 0 to 9.4 and higher scores indicating more disease activity). RESULTS At month 3, a higher percentage of patients in the tofacitinib groups than in the placebo groups met the criteria for an ACR 20 response (59.8% in the 5-mg tofacitinib group and 65.7% in the 10-mg tofacitinib group vs. 26.7% in the combined placebo groups, P<0.001 for both comparisons). The reductions from baseline in HAQ-DI scores were greater in the 5-mg and 10-mg tofacitinib groups than in the placebo groups (-0.50 and -0.57 points, respectively, vs. -0.19 points; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a DAS28-4(ESR) of less than 2.6 was not significantly higher with tofacitinib than with placebo (5.6% and 8.7% in the 5-mg and 10-mg tofacitinib groups, respectively, and 4.4% with placebo; P=0.62 and P=0.10 for the two comparisons). Serious infections developed in six patients who were receiving tofacitinib. Common adverse events were headache and upper respiratory tract infection. Tofacitinib treatment was associated with elevations in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and reductions in neutrophil counts. CONCLUSIONS In patients with active rheumatoid arthritis, tofacitinib monotherapy was associated with reductions in signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and improvement in physical function. (Funded by Pfizer; ORAL Solo ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00814307.).

Concomitant Leflunomide Therapy in Patients with Active Rheumatoid Arthritis despite Stable Doses of Methotrexate: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Context Several disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) slow disease progression in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Many experts prefer methotrexate, although trials do not uniformly show that it is superior to other DMARDs. It is not known whether combining methotrexate with a second DMARD is better than prescribing methotrexate alone. Contribution This 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial shows that leflunomide added to ongoing stable-dose methotrexate therapy in patients with persistently active rheumatoid arthritis improves clinical outcomes compared with methotrexate alone. Cautions Some adverse effects, such as diarrhea, were more common with combination therapy. All patients receiving DMARD therapy need close monitoring for toxicities. The Editors Rheumatoid arthritis has considerable societal costs (1-5). Many patients with rheumatoid arthritis become disabled within a few years of disease onset (4, 5). Methotrexate is the standard treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. During the past several years, investigators have found that some disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs can increase the efficacy of methotrexate monotherapy (6-9). Methotrexate is an antimetabolite and immunomodulator that affects many intracellular metabolic pathways of purine metabolism (10). The precise intracellular biochemical pathway responsible for the observed clinical benefits of methotrexate in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis is still the subject of some debate (11), but methotrexate is thought to act primarily on purine pathways of cellular metabolism (10). Leflunomide (Arava, Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Bridgewater, New Jersey) also has antimetabolic effects, inhibiting pyrimidine intracellular pathways (12). Leflunomide has been shown to be effective for rheumatoid arthritis in double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (13, 14). Given the diverse intracellular pathways affected by both drugs, the combination of leflunomide and methotrexate has the potential for biochemical synergy. The possibility of increased benefits should be weighed against the possible toxicities of this combination. Abnormal aminotransferase levels have been seen with both methotrexate (15) and leflunomide (14) monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. In a small open study, we previously observed that the combination of methotrexate and leflunomide led to considerable clinical improvements and reversible elevations in aminotransferase levels (16). We therefore sought to determine whether similar results could be achieved in a large, double-blind investigation of the combination of these two antimetabolic agents. Methods Patients The study sample consisted of 263 patients who had rheumatoid arthritis as defined by American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria (17). Patients were 18 to 75 years of age and were receiving stable dosages of methotrexate (15 to 20 mg/wk, or 10 to 15 mg/wk if this was the maximum tolerated dose). Patients were recruited from active outpatient practice centers, and study participants were approached without a particular schema. Eligible patients had active rheumatoid arthritis despite at least 6 months of methotrexate therapy, including stable dosage for at least 8 weeks. Patients with active rheumatoid arthritis were defined as meeting three of the following criteria on two different evaluations, 7 to 21 days apart: at least nine tender joints, at least six swollen joints, at least 45 minutes of morning stiffness, and an erythrocyte sedimentation rate of at least 28 mm/h. Previous disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, not including ongoing methotrexate, had failed in 11 patients. Patients receiving corticosteroids were required to have been taking a stable daily dose of 10 mg or less for at least 30 days before study drug administration, and the corticosteroid dose was required to remain constant throughout the study. Complete exclusion criteria are listed in Appendix Table 1. Study Design The 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, with evaluations occurring at 4-week intervals (Figure 1), was conducted in 20 centers in the United States and Canada between September 1998 and June 2000. The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding leflunomide or placebo to stable methotrexate therapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. All participants provided written consent, and the institutional review board at each center approved the protocol. Figure 1. Patient eligibility, randomization, assignment, and discontinuation. Include no wish to continue in study, poor adherence to treatment, protocol violation, and moving away from the study area. A randomization schedule, generated by and stored with Quintiles, Inc., Kansas City, Missouri, was used to assign sequential numbers to randomly allocated treatment codes. Randomization was done by using the Aventis standard random-code generator. Investigators allocated numbers to patients, beginning with the lowest available number. Quintiles, Inc., packaged and labeled the study medication. The randomization code used was concealed from investigators and patients throughout the study. Randomization was stratified by center. A set of 500 random numbers was generated, with treatment groups randomly assigned in a balanced manner (1:1 ratio) within each block of four consecutive random numbers (block size, 4). A set of these blocks was then sent to each investigative center. This method is identical to stratification by center because centers are balanced with respect to treatment assignment. Patients were randomly assigned to receive leflunomide, 100 mg/d, for 2 days followed by 10 mg/d or matching placebo. If substantial adverse events occurred, this dose could be reduced to 10 mg every other day. If 10 mg/d was tolerated but active disease, as defined earlier, was still present at week 8 or thereafter, an increase to 20 mg of leflunomide or matching placebo per day was required. If substantial adverse events occurred while the patient was taking 20 mg of the study drug per day, a one-time dose reduction to 10 mg/d was allowed at the discretion of the investigator. At least 1 mg of folate supplementation per day was mandated by the protocol. Adherence to study medication, assessed at each visit by tablet counts (actual number of tablets returned compared with number expected to be returned), was similar in the two groups. The mean adherence for all patients in the intention-to-treat sample was 98.0% (98.5% for those receiving placebo and 97.4% for those receiving leflunomide). In the placebo group and leflunomide group, respectively, 90.2% (120 of 133 patients) and 87.7% (114 of 130 patients) had adherence rates of 80% to 120%. Measurement of Efficacy The primary efficacy variable was the rate at which the intention-to-treat sample achieved 20% improvement in ACR criteria (ACR20) at the end of the study. To be classified as having achieved ACR20, patients were required to complete 24 weeks of treatment and meet ACR20 response criteria at end of the study (13). The ACR20 criteria were developed to define improvement in rheumatoid arthritis (18). Clinical improvement is indicated by 20% improvement in tender and swollen joint counts and 20% improvement in three of the following five criteria: patient global assessment, physician global assessment, pain intensity, physical function or disability measure, and level of acute-phase reactant (19). All ACR assessments were performed by the investigators, and the same assessor performed all analyses throughout the study whenever possible to increase the reliability of the assessment. Patients who discontinued therapy before the end of week 24 or for whom data were insufficient to assess ACR20 response at week 24 were classified as nonresponders for the primary analysis. Count of tender joints was based on 68 joint assessments, and count of swollen joints was based on 66 joint assessments. Percentage changes in tender joint and swollen joint counts were based on the number of evaluable joints at a visit. Joints that had been replaced or had been injected with corticosteroids within 4 weeks before the assessment were considered nonevaluable. Secondary outcomes included ACR50 and ACR70 responder rates at week 24 (analyses of responders at study end for the nonprimary efficacy measures). The ACR50 and ACR70 were defined as at least 50% and 70% improvement, respectively, in the same criteria used to calculate ACR20 response. Secondary efficacy variables also included change from baseline to end point in each of the individual components of the ACR response criteria and change from baseline to week 24 in levels of rheumatoid factor. Mean changes from baseline in individual efficacy measures are shown in Appendix Table 2. Measurement of Safety Safety was evaluated by adverse event reports; laboratory assays for changes in hematologic characteristics, blood chemistry, urinalysis, and liver function; and physical examination. Potential adverse events were assessed by using open-ended questions at each study visit. The assessor was blinded to reported toxicities and to any additional information obtained at the visit. The study protocol provided recommendations for dosage change and discontinuation of drug therapy, without unblinding, when patients were found to have alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) values greater than two times the upper limit of normal. Investigators decreased the dose of the study medication if, on repeated analysis at 72 hours, test values remained greater than two times but less than or equal to five times the upper limit of normal; only one dose adjustment was allowed before discontinuation of therapy with the study drug. Therapy with the study drug was also discontinued in patients with persistent elevations of aminotransferase enzyme levels to more than two times the upper limit of normal on repeated te

Sustained durability and tolerability of etanercept in ankylosing spondylitis for 96 weeks.

Objective: To evaluate the continued safety and durability of clinical response in patients with ankylosing spondylitis receiving etanercept. Methods: 277 patients who had participated in a previous randomised, double blind, placebo controlled 24 week trial were eligible to continue in this open label extension study. All patients who enrolled in the open label extension (n = 257) received subcutaneous etanercept 25 mg twice weekly for up to 72 weeks, for a combined 96 weeks of cumulative trial and open label experience. For the patients who had received etanercept for 24 weeks in the double blind trial, this represented almost 2 years of continuous etanercept treatment. Results: Patients continuing etanercept treatment had a sustained response for almost 2 years, with 74% achieving an ASsessments in Ankylosing Spondylitis 20% (ASAS 20) response after 96 weeks of etanercept treatment. Patients who had received placebo in the preceding double blind trial had similar responses, with 70% of patients attaining an ASAS 20 response after 24 weeks of etanercept treatment and 78% achieving an ASAS 20 response after 72 weeks. Improved spinal mobility was seen in both groups. Etanercept was well tolerated in patients treated for up to 96 weeks. Conclusion: The subcutaneous administration of twice weekly doses of etanercept provided sustained durability of response in the improvement of signs and symptoms of ankylosing spondylitis for nearly 2 years.

Abetimus sodium for renal flare in systemic lupus erythematosus: Results of a randomized, controlled phase III trial†

OBJECTIVE To investigate whether treatment with abetimus delays renal flare in patients with lupus nephritis. Secondary objectives included evaluation of the effect of abetimus on C3 levels, anti-double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) antibody levels, use of high-dose corticosteroids and/or cyclophosphamide, and major systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) flare. METHODS We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled study of treatment with abetimus at 100 mg/week for up to 22 months in SLE patients. Three hundred seventeen patients with a history of renal flare and anti-dsDNA levels >15 IU/ml were randomized to a treatment group (158 abetimus, 159 placebo); 298 (94%) were enrolled in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (145 abetimus, 153 placebo), based on the presence of high-affinity antibodies for the oligonucleotide epitope of abetimus at baseline screening. RESULTS Abetimus did not significantly prolong time to renal flare, time to initiation of high-dose corticosteroid and/or cyclophosphamide treatment, or time to major SLE flare. However, there were 25% fewer renal flares in the abetimus group compared with the placebo group (17 of 145 abetimus-treated patients [12%] versus 24 of 153 placebo-treated patients [16%]). Abetimus treatment decreased anti-dsDNA antibody levels (P < 0.0001), and reductions in anti-dsDNA levels were associated with increases in C3 levels (P < 0.0001). More patients in the abetimus group experienced > or =50% reductions in proteinuria at 1 year, compared with the placebo group (nominal P = 0.047). Trends toward reduced rates of renal flare and major SLE flare were noted in patients treated with abetimus who had impaired renal function at baseline. Treatment with abetimus for up to 22 months was well tolerated. CONCLUSION Abetimus at 100 mg/week significantly reduced anti-dsDNA antibody levels but did not significantly prolong time to renal flare when compared with placebo. Multiple positive trends in renal end points were observed in the abetimus treatment group.

The role of cytokines in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is characterized by persistent synovitis, local destruction of bone and cartilage and many systemic manifestations. Chronic inflammation within the synovial tissue appears to be the basis of all these manifestations of RA [24, 101]. Although the etiologic stimulus has not been identified, established rheumatoid synovitis is characterized by persistent immunologic activity. The predominant infiltrating cell in the rheumatoid synovium is the T lymphocyte [181]. T4 (helper-inducer) cells predominate over T8 (suppressor-cytotoxic) cells and are frequently found in close proximity to HLA-DR-positive macrophages and dendritic cells. Analysis of T cells in synovial fluid has documented an enrichment in CD29 expressing memory T4 cells and a marked reduction in the number of CD45R expressing naive T4 cells [120]. The infiltrating T cells appear to be activated, since they express activation antigens, such as HLA-DR [23]. In addition, they express an increased density of molecules, such as leukocyte functionassociated antigen 1 (LFA-1, CD1 la/CD18) that have been implicated in a variety of cell to cell interactions, including binding of circulating cells to postcapillary venules just prior to entry into sites of tissue inflammation. Finally, the T cells appear to have proliferated locally in the synovial tissue, perhaps in response to sequestered antigen, since they express determinants such as very late antigen (VLA-1) that appears on T cells only after prolonged proliferation [23]. Evidence of B cell activation can also be found in the inflamed synovium. Activated B lymphoblasts and plasma cells producing immunoglobulin and rheumatoid factor are characteristic features of rheumatoid synovitis [186]. Large numbers of macrophages with an activated phenotype are also found in rheumatoid synovium [43]. As a site of persistent inlmunologically mediated inflammation, the rheumatoid synovium is characterized by the presence of a number of secreted products of

Cellular basis for rheumatoid inflammation.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic idiopathic disease characterized by persistent inflammation of the synovium, local destruction of bone and cartilage, and a variety of systemic manifestations. Although the etiologic stimulus has not been identified, rheumatoid synovitis is characterized by persistent immunologic activity, with CD4(+)/CD29(+) memory T cells prominently involved. Many of the local and systemic manifestations of RA appear to result from the production of a variety of cytokines within the inflamed synovium. A number of other inflammatory mediators produced in the rheumatoid synovium, including arachidonic acid metabolites, vasoactive amines, platelet-activating factor, and complement cleavage products contribute to the inflammatory process. In addition, the local production of immunoglobulin and the autoantibody, rheumatoid factor, along with the local production of immune complexes and complement activation, play a major role in the destructive potential of rheumatoid synovitis. The driving force behind rheumatoid inflammation, however, is likely to be CD4(+) T cells responding to an antigenic epitope in the synovium in an HLA-DR restricted manner. Understanding the immunopathogenic process underlying rheumatoid inflammation should provide insight into approaches to control the disease effectively and specifically.

Interferon-γ release assay versus tuberculin skin test prior to treatment with golimumab, a human anti–tumor necrosis factor antibody, in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the performance of an interferon-γ release assay (IGRA) versus the standard tuberculin skin test (TST) as a screening tool for latent tuberculosis (TB) infection prior to the initiation of anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy in patients with autoimmune inflammatory diseases. METHODS This integrated analysis involved screening of patients with rheumatoid arthritis, those with psoriatic arthritis, and those with ankylosing spondylitis from phase III trials of golimumab. The IGRA used to screen for latent TB was the QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube test. RESULTS In this pooled analysis, 2,282 patients underwent both IGRA and TST screening prior to golimumab treatment. Among these patients, 13.8% had at least one test yielding positive findings for latent TB, including 9.4% with positive results by TST, 7.0% with positive results by IGRA, and 2.6% with positive results on both tests. The rate of indeterminate results for TB on IGRA was 1.8%. Agreement between the TST and IGRA results, measured by the kappa coefficient, was 0.22 (95% confidence interval 0.157-0.279; P=0.021). Among the patients with positive IGRA findings, 36.9% had positive TST findings. Among the patients with positive TST findings, 27.4% had positive IGRA findings. Overall, 781 (34.2%) of the 2,282 patients had previously received the bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine; among this vaccinated group, the rate of positivity for latent TB by TST was 15.2% (119 of 781), compared to a rate of positivity of 9.1% (71 of 781) by IGRA (P=0.0002). Among patients who had not received the BCG vaccine, the rate of positivity by TST was 5.0% (62 of 1,248) and the rate of positivity by IGRA was 5.8% (72 of 1,248) (P=0.3745). When the IGRA was repeated in patients whose results were initially indeterminate, the rate of indeterminate IGRA findings for latent TB was much lower than has been previously reported. CONCLUSION In the absence of a true gold standard test for latent TB infection, results of this comparison of IGRA and TST in a large cohort of patients with rheumatic diseases suggest that the IGRA provides greater specificity and possibly greater sensitivity than the TST.

RNA recognition by human TLR8 can lead to autoimmune inflammation

High expression level of human TLR8 in mice results in spontaneous, multiorgan inflammation attributable in part to increased DC activation.

Update on the safety profile of certolizumab pegol in rheumatoid arthritis: an integrated analysis from clinical trials

Objective To report the long-term safety data of certolizumab pegol (CZP) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) accumulated as of 30 November 2011. Design Data from 10 completed randomised controlled trials (RCT) of CZP in RA and several open-label extensions (OLE) were pooled across all doses. Reported adverse events (AE) occurred between the first dose and 84 days after the last dose. All deaths, serious infectious events (SIE) and malignancies were reviewed by external experts, classified according to predefined rules, and validated by an external steering committee. Incidence rates (IR) and event rates (ER) per 100 patient-years (PY) are presented. Results 4049 RA patients who received CZP were included in the safety pooling; total exposure 9277 PY, mean exposure 2.1 years (range 0.04–7.6). SIE, most frequently pneumonia (IR 0.73/100 PY), were the most common serious AE, occurring more frequently in CZP compared to placebo-treated patients in RCT (IR 5.61/100 PY vs 1.35/100 PY, odds ratio (OR) 4.35, 95% CI 0.65 to 29.30). SIE rates were lower in the CZP-treated population including OLE (ER 4.33/100 PY). 44 patients developed tuberculosis (IR 0.47/100 PY), 39 from high endemic regions. 58 deaths occurred in CZP-exposed patients (IR 0.63/100 PY) and 70 developed malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (IR 0.76/100 PY), including five lymphomas (IR 0.05/100 PY). Conclusions No new or unexpected safety signals associated with CZP emerged in this updated long-term safety analysis. While SIE rates were higher for CZP than for placebo in RCT, the rate decreased with continued exposure to CZP. These rates are consistent with data previously reported for CZP and other tumour necrosis factor inhibitors.