-
The Journal of Rheumatology May 2024To conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological treatments for adult-onset Still disease (AOSD). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological treatments for adult-onset Still disease (AOSD).
METHODS
Six databases, 2 trial registries, and conference abstracts were searched from January 2012 to February 2023 for studies of pharmacological interventions in people with AOSD. Outcomes were rates of remission and response, discontinuation of concurrent treatments, complications of AOSD, and treatment-related adverse events. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Joanna Briggs Institute tool for case series.
RESULTS
Forty-four studies evaluated treatments, including nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), corticosteroids (CS), conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), and biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs). For bDMARDs, tocilizumab (TCZ), anakinra (ANK), and canakinumab (CNK) had the most available data. Although 3 randomized controlled trials did not show statistically significant benefits of bDMARDs, metaanalyses showed high rates of complete remission and CS discontinuation. Complete remission was 80% (95% CI 59-92%, 36%), 73% (95% CI 58-84%, 66%), and 77% (95% CI 29-97%, 82%) and CS discontinuation was 57% (95% CI 29-81%, 66%), 47% (95% CI 18-78%, 79%), and 34% (95% CI 6-81%, 59%), respectively, for TCZ, ANK, and CNK. Studies with a higher proportion of patients previously treated with bDMARDs showed a trend toward lower rates of CS discontinuation ( = 0.05). The analyses had high clinical heterogeneity, largely because treatments were prescribed as different lines of therapy.
CONCLUSION
Evidence supports TCZ, ANK, and CNK therapy for AOSD. However, the magnitude of effect and comparative effectiveness of treatments is uncertain.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antirheumatic Agents; Biological Products; Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein; Remission Induction; Still's Disease, Adult-Onset; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38302170
DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.2023-0995 -
European Journal of Medical Research Feb 2023At the end of 2021, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) expanded its approval for the recombinant human interleukin-1 (IL-1) receptor antagonist Anakinra for the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
At the end of 2021, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) expanded its approval for the recombinant human interleukin-1 (IL-1) receptor antagonist Anakinra for the treatment of COVID-19 patients with elevated soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR). However, the role of Anakinra in COVID-19 remains unanswered, especially in patients receiving different forms of respiratory support. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review is to assess the safety and effects of Anakinra compared to placebo or standard care alone on clinical outcomes in adult hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.
METHODS
We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (comprising MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, medRxiv, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CCSR)) and the WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease database to identify completed and ongoing studies from inception of each database to December 13, 2021. Since then, we monitored new published studies weekly up to June 30, 2022 using the CCSR. We included RCTs comparing treatment with Anakinra to placebo or standard care alone in adult hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.
RESULTS
We included five RCTs with 1,627 patients (n = 888, n = 739, mean age 59.63 years, 64% male). Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool data. We found that Anakinra makes little or no difference to all-cause mortality at up to day 28 compared to placebo or standard care alone (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.64-1.45; RD 9 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 84 fewer to 104 more; 4 studies, 1593 participants; I = 49%; low certainty of evidence).
CONCLUSIONS
Anakinra has no effect on adult hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection regarding mortality, clinical improvement and worsening as well as on safety outcomes compared to placebo or standard care alone.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42021257552.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Female; COVID-19; Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 36841793
DOI: 10.1186/s40001-023-01072-z -
European Review For Medical and... Dec 2021Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be described as a chronic, inflammatory, progressive, autoimmune disorder characterized by generalized inflammation of the synovial joints,...
OBJECTIVE
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be described as a chronic, inflammatory, progressive, autoimmune disorder characterized by generalized inflammation of the synovial joints, which hereby triggers the progressive erosion of both cartilage and bone. Anakinra is a recombinant form of human IL-1 receptor antagonist which targets the type I IL-1 receptor. In the present systematic review, we intend to evaluate the effectiveness and adverse effects of interleukin-1 antagonists in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The database search was carried out using PubMed (Medline), Web of Science (Clarivate), Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library for the existing studies. A total of 3912 relevant articles were identified as per the search strategy. Out of them, 854 duplicate records and further 3024 records were excluded after going through their titles and abstracts. Further, out of 42 articles left, we excluded 32 more articles matching our inclusion criteria and excluding the reviews and case studies. Finally, we included 10 relevant studies that focused on both the effectiveness and adverse effects of interleukin-1 antagonists during the treatment of adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis in the present analysis. Nine out of 10 included studies are randomized trials (RCT) except for 1 study, which was an extension study.
RESULTS
The results showed an ACR20 response at week 12 and were the most common primary outcome measure in the present review. Various secondary outcome measures studied were changed from baseline at week 24 in individual ACR components. ACR50 and ACR70 responses at subsequent weeks (12 and 24), ESR components, HAQ score, CRP levels, and ESR. Notably, more improvement was observed with anakinra in comparison to placebo for achieving ACR50 and ACR70 responses at 24 weeks. Premature withdrawal of participants was observed in almost all the studies. Adverse drug reactions were attributed to be the most common reason followed by loss of efficacy for withdrawal of patients from the treatment. The infectious episode was another common adverse effect observed in both anakinra and placebo groups. Some malignancies were also documented in the included researches of this systematic analysis. We observed a lower overall incidence of malignancies for the studies screened compared with that of the general population.
CONCLUSIONS
This review demonstrated that anakinra is safe, effective, and well-tolerated, with no significant difference in adverse effects compared to placebo in rheumatoid arthritis patients.
Topics: Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Humans; Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein; Methotrexate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34982445
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202112_27630 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2022Interleukin-1 (IL-1) blocking agents have been used for treating severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), on the premise that their immunomodulatory effect might be... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Interleukin-1 (IL-1) blocking agents have been used for treating severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), on the premise that their immunomodulatory effect might be beneficial in people with COVID-19.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of IL-1 blocking agents compared with standard care alone or with placebo on effectiveness and safety outcomes in people with COVID-19. We will update this assessment regularly.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register and the COVID-19 L-OVE Platform (search date 5 November 2021). These sources are maintained through regular searches of MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, trial registers and other sources. We also checked the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, regulatory agency websites, Retraction Watch (search date 3 November 2021).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating IL-1 blocking agents compared with standard care alone or with placebo for people with COVID-19, regardless of disease severity.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed Cochrane methodology. The protocol was amended to reduce the number of outcomes considered. Two researchers independently screened and extracted data and assessed the risk of bias with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach for the critical outcomes of clinical improvement (Day 28; ≥ D60); WHO Clinical Progression Score of level 7 or above (i.e. the proportion of participants with mechanical ventilation +/- additional organ support OR death) (D28; ≥ D60); all-cause mortality (D28; ≥ D60); incidence of any adverse events; and incidence of serious adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified four RCTs of anakinra (three published in peer-reviewed journals, one reported as a preprint) and two RCTs of canakinumab (published in peer-reviewed journals). All trials were multicentre (2 to 133 centres). Two trials stopped early (one due to futility and one as the trigger for inferiority was met). The median/mean age range varied from 58 to 68 years; the proportion of men varied from 58% to 77%. All participants were hospitalised; 67% to 100% were on oxygen at baseline but not intubated; between 0% and 33% were intubated at baseline. We identified a further 16 registered trials with no results available, of which 15 assessed anakinra (four completed, four terminated, five ongoing, three not recruiting) and one (completed) trial assessed canakinumab. Effectiveness of anakinra for people with COVID-19 Anakinra probably results in little or no increase in clinical improvement at D28 (risk ratio (RR) 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.20; 3 RCTs, 837 participants; absolute effect: 59 more per 1000 (from 22 fewer to 147 more); moderate-certainty evidence. The evidence is uncertain about an effect of anakinra on 1) the proportion of participants with a WHO Clinical Progression Score of level 7 or above at D28 (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.22; 2 RCTs, 722 participants; absolute effect: 55 fewer per 1000 (from 107 fewer to 37 more); low-certainty evidence) and ≥ D60 (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.96; 1 RCT, 606 participants; absolute effect: 47 fewer per 1000 (from 72 fewer to 4 fewer) low-certainty evidence); and 2) all-cause mortality at D28 (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.39; 2 RCTs, 722 participants; absolute effect: 32 fewer per 1000 (from 68 fewer to 40 more); low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about an effect of anakinra on 1) the proportion of participants with clinical improvement at ≥ D60 (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.12; 1 RCT, 115 participants; absolute effect: 59 fewer per 1000 (from 186 fewer to 102 more); very low-certainty evidence); and 2) all-cause mortality at ≥ D60 (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.56; 4 RCTs, 1633 participants; absolute effect: 8 more per 1000 (from 84 fewer to 147 more); very low-certainty evidence). Safety of anakinra for people with COVID-19 Anakinra probably results in little or no increase in adverse events (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.11; 2 RCTs, 722 participants; absolute effect: 14 more per 1000 (from 43 fewer to 78 more); moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is uncertain regarding an effect of anakinra on serious adverse events (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.56; 2 RCTs, 722 participants; absolute effect: 12 fewer per 1000 (from 104 fewer to 138 more); low-certainty evidence). Effectiveness of canakinumab for people with COVID-19 Canakinumab probably results in little or no increase in clinical improvement at D28 (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.14; 2 RCTs, 499 participants; absolute effect: 42 more per 1000 (from 33 fewer to 116 more); moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence of an effect of canakinumab is uncertain on 1) the proportion of participants with a WHO Clinical Progression Score of level 7 or above at D28 (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.20; 2 RCTs, 499 participants; absolute effect: 35 fewer per 1000 (from 69 fewer to 25 more); low-certainty evidence); and 2) all-cause mortality at D28 (RR:0.75; 95% CI 0.39 to 1.42); 2 RCTs, 499 participants; absolute effect: 20 fewer per 1000 (from 48 fewer to 33 more); low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about an effect of canakinumab on all-cause mortality at ≥ D60 (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.91; 1 RCT, 45 participants; absolute effect: 112 fewer per 1000 (from 210 fewer to 227 more); very low-certainty evidence). Safety of canakinumab for people with COVID-19 Canakinumab probably results in little or no increase in adverse events (RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.21; 1 RCT, 454 participants; absolute effect: 11 more per 1000 (from 74 fewer to 111 more); moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence of an effect of canakinumab on serious adverse events is uncertain (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.13; 2 RCTs, 499 participants; absolute effect: 44 fewer per 1000 (from 94 fewer to 28 more); low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, we did not find evidence for an important beneficial effect of IL-1 blocking agents. The evidence is uncertain or very uncertain for several outcomes. Sixteen trials of anakinra and canakinumab with no results are currently registered, of which four are completed, and four terminated. The findings of this review are updated on the COVID-NMA platform (covid-nma.com).
Topics: Aged; Female; Humans; Interleukin-1; Male; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration, Artificial; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 35080773
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015308 -
Biologics : Targets & Therapy 2019Greater understanding of the roles of tumor necrosis factor-α, IL-1β, IL-10, and the IL-23/T-helper (Th) 17 and IL-12/Th1 pathways in immune dysregulation in... (Review)
Review
Greater understanding of the roles of tumor necrosis factor-α, IL-1β, IL-10, and the IL-23/T-helper (Th) 17 and IL-12/Th1 pathways in immune dysregulation in moderate/severe hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) has helped in developing new regimens. We aim to review the use of different immunomodulatory therapies used to manage HS. A comprehensive literature search was conducted on the PubMed and Clinicaltrials.gov databases from 1 January 1947 to 31 December 2018. Only clinical trials, case reports, case series and retrospective analyses published in the English language were included. Our search yielded 107 articles and 35 clinical trials, of which 15 are still ongoing. The tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors adalimumab and infliximab were the most comprehensively studied agents. Published data from clinical trials support the efficacy of adalimumab, infliximab, anakinra, ustekinumab, bermekimab and apremilast but not etanercept and MEDI8968. Clinical trials for CJM112 have been completed, with results awaiting publication. Trials are underway for secukinumab, IFX-1, INCB054707 and bimekizumab. Biologics used in smaller cohorts include canakinumab, golimumab and rituximab. Most agents are well tolerated and demonstrate a good safety profile, with the most commonly reported adverse event being infections. To date, adalimumab is the only biologic which has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for HS. However, other agents also show promise, with further trials underway to evaluate their efficacy, tolerability and safety profiles. Different clinical measurement scores and endpoints used to make direct comparison difficult. Longitudinal surveillance and pooled registry data are paramount to evaluate the long-term safety profile and efficacy of therapy.
PubMed: 31190730
DOI: 10.2147/BTT.S199862 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023This scoping review explores the effectiveness of IL-1 pathway inhibitors in managing PSTPIP1-associated inflammatory diseases (PAID). These diseases are marked by...
INTRODUCTION
This scoping review explores the effectiveness of IL-1 pathway inhibitors in managing PSTPIP1-associated inflammatory diseases (PAID). These diseases are marked by abnormal IL-1 pathway activation due to genetic mutations.
METHODS
Our methodology adhered to a pre-published protocol and involved a thorough search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases up to February 2022, following the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer's Manual and the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. The review included studies reporting on IL-1 pathway inhibitor use in PAID patients.
RESULTS
From an initial pool of 5,225 articles, 36 studies involving 43 patients were selected. The studies predominantly used observational designs and exhibited diversity in patient demographics, treatment approaches, and outcomes. Anakinra and canakinumab demonstrated promise in treating sterile pyogenic arthritis, pyoderma gangrenosum, and acne (PAPA) and PSTPIP1-associated myeloid-related-proteinemia inflammatory (PAMI) syndromes, with scant data on other syndromes. Notably, there was a paucity of information on the adverse effects of these treatments, necessitating cautious interpretation of their safety profile.
CONCLUSION
Current evidence on IL-1 pathway inhibitors for PAID is primarily from observational studies and remains limited. Rigorous research with larger patient cohorts is imperative for more definitive conclusions. Collaborative efforts among specialized research centers and international health initiatives are key to advancing this field.
Topics: Humans; Acne Vulgaris; Adaptor Proteins, Signal Transducing; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Arthritis, Infectious; Cytoskeletal Proteins; Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein; Interleukin-1
PubMed: 38259483
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1339337 -
Infection & Chemotherapy Jun 2021This study aims to assess anakinra's safety and efficacy for treating severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Numerous electronic databases were searched and finally... (Review)
Review
This study aims to assess anakinra's safety and efficacy for treating severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Numerous electronic databases were searched and finally 15 studies with a total of 3,530 patients, 757 in the anakinra arm, 1,685 in the control arm were included. The pooled adjusted odds ratio (OR) for mortality in the treatment arm was 0.34 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21 - 0.54, I² = 48%), indicating a significant association between anakinra and mortality. A significant association was found regarding mechanical ventilation requirements in anakinra group compared to the control group OR, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.49 - 0.95, I² = 50%). For the safety of anakinra, we evaluated thromboembolism risk and liver transaminases elevation. Thromboembolism risk was OR, 1.59 (95% CI, 0.65 - 3.91, I² = 0%) and elevation in liver transaminases with OR was 1.35 (95% CI, 0.61 - 3.03, I² = 76%). Both were not statistically significant over the control group. Anakinra is beneficial in lowering mortality in COVID-19 patients. However, these non-significant differences in the safety profile between the anakinra and control groups may have been the result of baseline characteristics of the intervention group, and further studies are essential in evaluating anakinra's safety profile.
PubMed: 34216117
DOI: 10.3947/ic.2021.0016 -
Rheumatology (Oxford, England) Dec 2021Acute respiratory distress syndrome and cytokine release syndrome are the major complications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated with increased mortality... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Acute respiratory distress syndrome and cytokine release syndrome are the major complications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated with increased mortality risk. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of anakinra in adult hospitalized non-intubated patients with COVID-19.
METHODS
Relevant trials were identified by searching literature until 24 April 2021 using the following terms: anakinra, IL-1, coronavirus, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2. Trials evaluating the effect of anakinra on the need for invasive mechanical ventilation and mortality in hospitalized non-intubated patients with COVID-19 were included.
RESULTS
Nine studies (n = 1119) were eligible for inclusion in the present meta-analysis. Their bias risk with reference to the assessed parameters was high. In pooled analyses, anakinra reduced the need for invasive mechanical ventilation (odds ratio (OR): 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17-0.85, P = 0.02, I2 = 67%; six studies, n = 587) and mortality risk (OR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.23-0.45, P < 0.00001, I2 = 0%; nine studies, n = 1119) compared with standard of care therapy. There were no differences regarding the risk of adverse events, including liver dysfunction (OR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.48-1.16, P > 0.05, I2 = 28%; five studies, n = 591) and bacteraemia (OR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.42-2.73, P > 0.05, I2 = 71%; six studies, n = 727).
CONCLUSIONS
Available evidence shows that treatment with anakinra reduces both the need for invasive mechanical ventilation and mortality risk of hospitalized non-intubated patients with COVID-19 without increasing the risk of adverse events. Confirmation of efficacy and safety requires randomized placebo-controlled trials.
Topics: Humans; Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein; Receptors, Interleukin-1; Treatment Outcome; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 33999135
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/keab447 -
Laryngoscope Investigative... Dec 2020The study systematically reviewed the existing literature on the management of autoimmune inner ear disease (AIED). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
The study systematically reviewed the existing literature on the management of autoimmune inner ear disease (AIED).
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review.
METHODS
We performed a literature search of Embase, NCBI, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases from April 1990 to April 2020. Inclusion criteria included studies that were retrospective or prospective in nature evaluating the treatment of AIED with audiometric data measuring hearing outcomes during treatment. Hearing improvement was the primary study outcome and improvement in vestibular symptoms was the secondary study outcome.
RESULTS
Sixteen of 412 candidate articles were included in our study. Systemic steroid treatment is most commonly described. Alternative treatment modalities included intratympanic steroid treatment, methotrexate, cyclophosphamide, azathioprine, infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, golimumab, methylprednisolone, rituximab, and anakinra.
CONCLUSION
Systemic corticosteroids are the first line treatment of AIED. Intratympanic steroids are a potential adjuvant or alternative treatment for patients who cannot tolerate or become refractory to steroid treatment. Steroid nonresponders may benefit from biologic therapy. Alternative treatment modalities including nonsteroidal immunosuppressants and biologics have been studied in small cohorts of patients with varying results. Prospective studies investigating the efficacy of biologic and nonsteroidal therapy are warranted.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
2.
PubMed: 33364414
DOI: 10.1002/lio2.508 -
Pediatric Rheumatology Online Journal Dec 2015Macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) is a severe and potentially lethal complication of several inflammatory diseases but seems particularly linked to systemic juvenile... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) is a severe and potentially lethal complication of several inflammatory diseases but seems particularly linked to systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA). Standardized diagnostic and treatment guidelines for MAS in sJIA are currently lacking. The aim of this systematic literature review was to evaluate currently available literature on diagnostic criteria for MAS in sJIA and provide an overview of possible biomarkers for diagnosis, disease activity and treatment response and recent advances in treatment.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane. 495 papers were identified. Potentially relevant papers were selected by 3 authors after which full text screening was performed. All selected papers were evaluated by at least two independent experts for validity and level of evidence according to EULAR guidelines.
RESULTS
27 papers were included: 7 on diagnosis, 9 on biomarkers and 11 on treatment. Systematic review of the literature confirmed that there are no validated diagnostic criteria for MAS in sJIA. The preliminary Ravelli criteria, with the addition of ferritin, performed well in a large retrospective case-control study. Recently, an international consortium lead by PRINTO proposed a new set of diagnostic criteria able to distinguish MAS from active sJIA and/or infection with superior performance. Other promising diagnostic biomarkers potentially distinguish MAS complicating sJIA from primary and virus-associated hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. The highest level of evidence for treatment comes from case-series. High dose corticosteroids with or without cyclosporine A were frequently reported as first-line therapy. From the newer treatment modalities, promising responses have been reported with anakinra.
CONCLUSION
MAS in sJIA seems to be diagnosed best by the recently proposed PRINTO criteria, although prospective validation is needed. Novel promising biomarkers for sJIA related MAS are in need of prospective validation as well, and are not widely available yet. Currently, treatment of MAS in sJIA relies more on experience than evidence based medicine. Taking into account the severity of MAS and the scarcity of evidence, early expert consultation is recommended as soon as MAS is suspected.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Arthritis, Juvenile; Biomarkers; Cyclosporine; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Macrophage Activation Syndrome
PubMed: 26634252
DOI: 10.1186/s12969-015-0055-3