Ronald F. van Vollenhoven

Derivation and validation of the systemic lupus international collaborating clinics classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus

OBJECTIVE The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) group revised and validated the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria in order to improve clinical relevance, meet stringent methodology requirements, and incorporate new knowledge regarding the immunology of SLE. METHODS The classification criteria were derived from a set of 702 expert-rated patient scenarios. Recursive partitioning was used to derive an initial rule that was simplified and refined based on SLICC physician consensus. The SLICC group validated the classification criteria in a new validation sample of 690 new expert-rated patient scenarios. RESULTS Seventeen criteria were identified. In the derivation set, the SLICC classification criteria resulted in fewer misclassifications compared with the current ACR classification criteria (49 versus 70; P = 0.0082) and had greater sensitivity (94% versus 86%; P < 0.0001) and equal specificity (92% versus 93%; P = 0.39). In the validation set, the SLICC classification criteria resulted in fewer misclassifications compared with the current ACR classification criteria (62 versus 74; P = 0.24) and had greater sensitivity (97% versus 83%; P < 0.0001) but lower specificity (84% versus 96%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION The new SLICC classification criteria performed well in a large set of patient scenarios rated by experts. According to the SLICC rule for the classification of SLE, the patient must satisfy at least 4 criteria, including at least one clinical criterion and one immunologic criterion OR the patient must have biopsy-proven lupus nephritis in the presence of antinuclear antibodies or anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies.

A phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled study of belimumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits B lymphocyte stimulator, in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus.

OBJECTIVE To assess the efficacy/safety of the B lymphocyte stimulator inhibitor belimumab plus standard therapy compared with placebo plus standard therapy in active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). METHODS In a phase III, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, 819 antinuclear antibody-positive or anti-double-stranded DNA-positive SLE patients with scores ≥6 on the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment (SELENA) version of the SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 1 mg/kg belimumab, 10 mg/kg belimumab, or placebo intravenously on days 0, 14, and 28 and then every 28 days for 72 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the SLE Responder Index (SRI) response rate at week 52 (an SRI response was defined as a ≥4-point reduction in SELENA-SLEDAI score, no new British Isles Lupus Assessment Group [BILAG] A organ domain score and no more than 1 new BILAG B score, and no worsening in physicians global assessment score versus baseline). RESULTS Belimumab at 10 mg/kg plus standard therapy met the primary efficacy end point, generating a significantly greater SRI response at week 52 compared with placebo (43.2% versus 33.5%; P = 0.017). The rate with 1 mg/kg belimumab was 40.6% (P = 0.089). Response rates at week 76 were 32.4%, 39.1%, and 38.5% with placebo, 1 mg/kg belimumab, and 10 mg/kg belimumab, respectively. In post hoc sensitivity analyses evaluating higher SELENA-SLEDAI score thresholds, 10 mg/kg belimumab achieved better discrimination at weeks 52 and 76. Risk of severe flares over 76 weeks (based on the modified SLE Flare Index) was reduced with 1 mg/kg belimumab (34%) (P = 0.023) and 10 mg/kg belimumab (23%) (P = 0.13). Serious and severe adverse events, including infections, laboratory abnormalities, malignancies, and deaths, were comparable across groups. CONCLUSION Belimumab plus standard therapy significantly improved SRI response rate, reduced SLE disease activity and severe flares, and was generally well tolerated in SLE.

Certolizumab pegol plus methotrexate is significantly more effective than placebo plus methotrexate in active rheumatoid arthritis: Findings of a fifty-two–week, phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study†‡

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2 dosage regimens of lyophilized certolizumab pegol (a novel PEGylated anti-tumor necrosis factor agent) as adjunctive therapy to methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to MTX therapy alone. METHODS In this 52-week, phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, 982 patients were randomized 2:2:1 to receive treatment with subcutaneous certolizumab pegol at an initial dosage of 400 mg given at weeks 0, 2, and 4, with a subsequent dosage of 200 mg or 400 mg given every 2 weeks, plus MTX, or placebo plus MTX. Co-primary end points were the response rate at week 24 according to the American College of Rheumatology 20% criteria for improvement (ACR20) and the mean change from baseline in the modified total Sharp score at week 52. RESULTS At week 24, ACR20 response rates using nonresponder imputation for the certolizumab pegol 200-mg and 400-mg groups were 58.8% and 60.8%, respectively, as compared with 13.6% for the placebo group. Differences in ACR20 response rates versus placebo were significant at week 1 and were sustained to week 52 (P < 0.001). At week 52, mean radiographic progression from baseline was reduced in patients treated with certolizumab pegol 200 mg (0.4 Sharp units) or 400 mg (0.2 Sharp units) as compared with that in placebo-treated patients (2.8 Sharp units) (P < 0.001 by rank analysis). Improvements in all ACR core set of disease activity measures, including physical function, were observed by week 1 with both certolizumab pegol dosage regimens. Most adverse events were mild or moderate. CONCLUSION Treatment with certolizumab pegol 200 or 400 mg plus MTX resulted in a rapid and sustained reduction in RA signs and symptoms, inhibited the progression of structural joint damage, and improved physical function as compared with placebo plus MTX treatment in RA patients with an incomplete response to MTX.

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–IVA 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.

Tofacitinib or Adalimumab versus Placebo in Rheumatoid Arthritis

BACKGROUND Tofacitinib (CP-690,550) is a novel oral Janus kinase inhibitor that is being investigated for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS In this 12-month, phase 3 trial, 717 patients who were receiving stable doses of methotrexate were randomly assigned to 5 mg of tofacitinib twice daily, 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily, 40 mg of adalimumab once every 2 weeks, or placebo. At month 3, patients in the placebo group who did not have a 20% reduction from baseline in the number of swollen and tender joints were switched in a blinded fashion to either 5 mg or 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily; at month 6, all patients still receiving placebo were switched to tofacitinib in a blinded fashion. The three primary outcome measures were a 20% improvement at month 6 in the American College of Rheumatology scale (ACR 20); the change from baseline to month 3 in the score on the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) (which ranges from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating greater disability); and the percentage of patients at month 6 who had 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 greater disease activity). RESULTS At month 6, ACR 20 response rates were higher among patients receiving 5 mg or 10 mg of tofacitinib (51.5% and 52.6%, respectively) and among those receiving adalimumab (47.2%) than among those receiving placebo (28.3%) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). There were also greater reductions in the HAQ-DI score at month 3 and higher percentages of patients with a DAS28-4(ESR) below 2.6 at month 6 in the active-treatment groups than in the placebo group. Adverse events occurred more frequently with tofacitinib than with placebo, and pulmonary tuberculosis developed in two patients in the 10-mg tofacitinib group. Tofacitinib was associated with an increase in both low-density and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels and with reductions in neutrophil counts. CONCLUSIONS In patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving background methotrexate, tofacitinib was significantly superior to placebo and was numerically similar to adalimumab in efficacy. (Funded by Pfizer; ORAL Standard ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00853385.).

Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: 2014 update of the recommendations of an international task force

Background Reaching the therapeutic target of remission or low-disease activity has improved outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) significantly. The treat-to-target recommendations, formulated in 2010, have provided a basis for implementation of a strategic approach towards this therapeutic goal in routine clinical practice, but these recommendations need to be re-evaluated for appropriateness and practicability in the light of new insights. Objective To update the 2010 treat-to-target recommendations based on systematic literature reviews (SLR) and expert opinion. Methods A task force of rheumatologists, patients and a nurse specialist assessed the SLR results and evaluated the individual items of the 2010 recommendations accordingly, reformulating many of the items. These were subsequently discussed, amended and voted upon by >40 experts, including 5 patients, from various regions of the world. Levels of evidence, strengths of recommendations and levels of agreement were derived. Results The update resulted in 4 overarching principles and 10 recommendations. The previous recommendations were partly adapted and their order changed as deemed appropriate in terms of importance in the view of the experts. The SLR had now provided also data for the effectiveness of targeting low-disease activity or remission in established rather than only early disease. The role of comorbidities, including their potential to preclude treatment intensification, was highlighted more strongly than before. The treatment aim was again defined as remission with low-disease activity being an alternative goal especially in patients with long-standing disease. Regular follow-up (every 1–3 months during active disease) with according therapeutic adaptations to reach the desired state was recommended. Follow-up examinations ought to employ composite measures of disease activity that include joint counts. Additional items provide further details for particular aspects of the disease, especially comorbidity and shared decision-making with the patient. Levels of evidence had increased for many items compared with the 2010 recommendations, and levels of agreement were very high for most of the individual recommendations (≥9/10). Conclusions The 4 overarching principles and 10 recommendations are based on stronger evidence than before and are supposed to inform patients, rheumatologists and other stakeholders about strategies to reach optimal outcomes of RA.

Tocilizumab monotherapy versus adalimumab monotherapy for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (ADACTA): a randomised, double-blind, controlled phase 4 trial

BACKGROUND Roughly a third of patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with biological treatments receive them as monotherapy. Tocilizumab--an inhibitor of interleukin 6 receptor signalling--has been studied as monotherapy in several clinical trials. We assessed the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab monotherapy compared with adalimumab monotherapy for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS We did this randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 4 superiority study in 76 centres in 15 countries in North and South America, Australasia, and Europe. We enrolled patients who were aged at least 18 years, had severe rheumatoid arthritis for 6 months or more, and were intolerant to methotrexate or were inappropriate for continued methotrexate treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1; block size of four) to receive tocilizumab 8 mg per kg bodyweight intravenously every 4 weeks plus placebo subcutaneously every 2 weeks or adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks plus placebo intravenously every 4 weeks for 24 weeks. Investigators, patients, and sponsor personnel were masked to assignment. The primary endpoint was change in disease activity score using 28 joints (DAS28) from baseline to week 24. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01119859. FINDINGS We screened 452 patients and enrolled 326 patients. The intention-to-treat population contained 325 patients (163 assigned to tocilizumab, 162 assigned to adalimumab). Week 24 mean change from baseline in DAS28 was significantly greater in the tocilizumab group (-3·3) than in the adalimumab group (-1·8) patients (difference -1·5, 95% CI -1·8 to -1·1; p<0·0001). 16 of 162 (10%) patients in the adalimumab group versus 19 of 162 (12%) in the tocilizumab group had serious adverse events. More patients in the tocilizumab group than in the adalimumab group had increased LDL-cholesterol, increased alanine aminotransferase concentrations, and reduced platelet and neutrophil counts. INTERPRETATION Tocilizumab monotherapy was superior to adalimumab monotherapy for reduction of signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis in patients for whom methotrexate was deemed inappropriate. The adverse event profiles of tocilizumab and adalimumab were consistent with previous findings. FUNDING F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Efficacy and Safety of Certolizumab Pegol Plus Methotrexate in Active Rheumatoid Arthritis: The RAPID 2 Study

Background: Certolizumab pegol is a PEGylated tumour necrosis factor inhibitor. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol versus placebo, plus methotrexate (MTX), in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: An international, multicentre, phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in active adult-onset RA. Patients (n = 619) were randomised 2:2:1 to subcutaneous certolizumab pegol (liquid formulation) 400 mg at weeks 0, 2 and 4 followed by 200 mg or 400 mg plus MTX, or placebo plus MTX, every 2 weeks for 24 weeks. The primary end point was ACR20 response at week 24. Secondary end points included ACR50 and ACR70 responses, change from baseline in modified Total Sharp Score, ACR core set variables and physical function. Results: Significantly more patients in the certolizumab pegol 200 mg and 400 mg groups achieved an ACR20 response versus placebo (p⩽0.001); rates were 57.3%, 57.6% and 8.7%, respectively. Certolizumab pegol 200 and 400 mg also significantly inhibited radiographic progression; mean changes from baseline in mTSS at week 24 were 0.2 and −0.4, respectively, versus 1.2 for placebo (rank analysis p⩽0.01). Certolizumab pegol-treated patients reported rapid and significant improvements in physical function versus placebo; mean changes from baseline in HAQ-DI at week 24 were −0.50 and −0.50, respectively, versus −0.14 for placebo (p⩽0.001). Most adverse events were mild or moderate, with low incidence of withdrawals due to adverse events. Five patients developed tuberculosis. Conclusion: Certolizumab pegol plus MTX was more efficacious than placebo plus MTX, rapidly and significantly improving signs and symptoms of RA and physical function and inhibiting radiographic progression. Trial registration number: NCT00175877

CD25brightCD4+regulatory T cells are enriched in inflamed joints of patients with chronic rheumatic disease

CD25+CD4+ regulatory T cells participate in the regulation of immune responses. We recently demonstrated the presence of CD25brightCD4+ regulatory T cells with a capacity to control T cell proliferation in the joints of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Here, we investigate a possible accumulation of these regulatory T cells in the inflamed joint of different rheumatic diseases including rheumatoid arthritis. The studies are also extended to analyze whether cytokine production can be suppressed by the regulatory T cells. Synovial fluid and peripheral blood samples were obtained during relapse from 36 patients with spondyloarthropathies, 21 adults with juvenile idiopathic arthritis and 135 patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and the frequency of CD25brightCD4+ T cells was determined. Of 192 patients, 182 demonstrated a higher frequency of CD25brightCD4+ T cells in synovial fluid than in peripheral blood. In comparison with healthy subjects, the patients had significantly fewer CD25brightCD4+ T cells in peripheral blood. For functional studies, synovial fluid cells from eight patients were sorted by flow cytometry, and the suppressive capacity of the CD25brightCD4+ T cells was determined in in vitro cocultures. The CD25brightCD4+ T cells suppressed the production of both type 1 and 2 cytokines including interleukin-17, as well as proliferation, independently of diagnosis. Thus, irrespective of the inflammatory joint disease investigated, CD25brightCD4+ T cells were reduced in peripheral blood and enriched in the joint, suggesting an active recruitment of regulatory T cells to the affected joint. Their capacity to suppress both proliferation and cytokine secretion might contribute to a dampening of local inflammatory processes.

Tofacitinib versus Methotrexate in Rheumatoid Arthritis

BACKGROUND Methotrexate is the most frequently used first-line antirheumatic drug. We report the findings of a phase 3 study of monotherapy with tofacitinib, an oral Janus kinase inhibitor, as compared with methotrexate monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had not previously received methotrexate or therapeutic doses of methotrexate. METHODS We randomly assigned 958 patients to receive 5 mg or 10 mg of tofacitinib twice daily or methotrexate at a dose that was incrementally increased to 20 mg per week over 8 weeks; 956 patients received a study drug. The coprimary end points at month 6 were the mean change from baseline in the van der Heijde modified total Sharp score (which ranges from 0 to 448, with higher scores indicating greater structural joint damage) and the proportion of patients with an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 70 response (≥70% reduction in the number of both tender and swollen joints and ≥70% improvement in three of five other criteria: the patients assessment of pain, level of disability, C-reactive protein level or erythrocyte sedimentation rate, global assessment of disease by the patient, and global assessment of disease by the physician). RESULTS Mean changes in the modified total Sharp score from baseline to month 6 were significantly smaller in the tofacitinib groups than in the methotrexate group, but changes were modest in all three groups (0.2 points in the 5-mg tofacitinib group and <0.1 point in the 10-mg tofacitinib group, as compared with 0.8 points in the methotrexate group [P<0.001 for both comparisons]). Among the patients receiving tofacitinib, 25.5% in the 5-mg group and 37.7% in the 10-mg group had an ACR 70 response at month 6, as compared with 12.0% of patients in the methotrexate group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Herpes zoster developed in 31 of 770 patients who received tofacitinib (4.0%) and in 2 of 186 patients who received methotrexate (1.1%). Confirmed cases of cancer (including three cases of lymphoma) developed in 5 patients who received tofacitinib and in 1 patient who received methotrexate. Tofacitinib was associated with increases in creatinine levels and in low-density and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. CONCLUSIONS In patients who had not previously received methotrexate or therapeutic doses of methotrexate, tofacitinib monotherapy was superior to methotrexate in reducing signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis and inhibiting the progression of structural joint damage. The benefits of tofacitinib need to be considered in the context of the risks of adverse events. (Funded by Pfizer; ORAL Start ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01039688.).