-
International Journal of Environmental... Aug 2021Tocilizumab is an anti-IL-6 therapy widely adopted in the management of the so-called "cytokine storm" related to SARS-CoV-2 virus infection, but its effectiveness, use... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Tocilizumab Therapy versus Standard of Care in over 15,000 COVID-19 Pneumonia Patients during the First Eight Months of the Pandemic.
BACKGROUND
Tocilizumab is an anti-IL-6 therapy widely adopted in the management of the so-called "cytokine storm" related to SARS-CoV-2 virus infection, but its effectiveness, use in relation to concomitant corticosteroid therapy and safety were unproven despite widespread use in numerous studies, mostly open label at the start of the pandemic.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control studies utilising tocilizumab in COVID-19 on different databases (PubMed/MEDLINE/Scopus) and preprint servers (medRxiv and SSRN) from inception until 20 July 2020 (PROSPERO CRD42020195690). Subgroup analyses and meta-regressions were performed. The impact of tocilizumab and concomitant corticosteroid therapy or tocilizumab alone versus standard of care (SOC) on the death rate, need for mechanical ventilation, ICU admission and bacterial infections were assessed.
RESULTS
Thirty-nine studies with 15,531 patients (3657 cases versus 11,874 controls) were identified. Unadjusted estimates ( = 28) failed to demonstrate a protective effect of tocilizumab on survival (OR 0.74 ([95%CI 0.55-1.01], = 0.057), mechanical ventilation prevention (OR 2.21 [95%CI 0.53-9.23], = 0.277) or prevention of ICU admission (OR 3.79 [95%CI 0.38-37.34], = 0.254). Considering studies with adjusted, estimated, tocilizumab use was associated with mortality rate reduction (HR 0.50 ([95%CI 0.38-0.64], < 0.001) and prevention of ICU admission (OR 0.16 ([95%CI 0.06-0.43], < 0.001). Tocilizumab with concomitant steroid use versus SOC was protective with an OR of 0.49 ([95%CI 0.36-0.65], < 0.05) as was tocilizumab alone versus SOC with an OR of 0.59 ([95%CI 0.34-1.00], < 0.001). Risk of infection increased (2.36 [95%CI 1.001-5.54], = 0.050; based on unadjusted estimates).
CONCLUSION
Despite the heterogeneity of included studies and large number of preprint articles, our findings from the first eight of the pandemic in over 15,000 COVID-19 cases suggested an incremental efficacy of tocilizumab in severe COVID-19 that were confirmed by subsequent meta-analyses of large randomized trials of tocilizumab. This suggests that analysis of case-control studies and pre-print server data in the early stages of a pandemic appeared robust for supporting incremental benefits and lack of major therapeutic toxicity of tocilizumab for severe COVID-19.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Humans; Pandemics; SARS-CoV-2; Standard of Care; Treatment Outcome; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 34501738
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18179149 -
BioDrugs : Clinical Immunotherapeutics,... Nov 2021Immunogenicity with formation of anti-drug antibodies (ADA) to biologics is an important reason for treatment failure in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Our aim was to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Immunogenicity with formation of anti-drug antibodies (ADA) to biologics is an important reason for treatment failure in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Our aim was to assess the rate of ADA, the effect of combination therapy with immunomodulators on ADA and the influence of ADA on efficacy and safety of biologics for IBD treatment.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from inception to April 2020 for trials of biologics that assessed immunogenicity. The overall certainty of evidence was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE). The primary outcome was rate of ADA. Secondary outcomes included efficacy and safety outcomes among patients with detectable versus undetectable ADA. For dichotomous outcomes, pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.
RESULTS
Data from 68 studies were analyzed and 33 studies (5850 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled ADA rates for biologic monotherapy were 28.0% for infliximab, 7.5% for adalimumab, 3.8% for golimumab, 10.9% for certolizumab, 6.2% for ustekinumab and 16.0% for natalizumab. Pooled ADA rates were 8.4% for vedolizumab and 5.0% for etrolizumab for combo- and monotherapy combined. In all biologics, ADA rates were underestimated by use of drug-sensitive ADA assays and higher dose and/or frequency. ADA rate was significantly reduced in patients treated with combination therapy for infliximab (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.44-0.62), adalimumab (RR 0.31; 95% CI 0.14-0.69), golimumab (RR 0.29; 95% CI 0.10-0.83), certolizumab pegol (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.14-0.67) and natalizumab (RR 0.20; 95% CI 0.11-0. 39). ADA to infliximab were associated with lower clinical response rates (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.61-0.91) and higher rates of infusion reactions (RR 2.36; 95% CI 1.85-3.01).
CONCLUSIONS
Differences in analytical methods to detect ADA hamper comparison of true ADA rates across biologics in IBD. Use of combination therapy with immunomodulators appeared to reduce ADA positivity for most biologics. For infliximab, ADA were associated with reduced drug efficacy and increased adverse events.
Topics: Adalimumab; Antibody Formation; Biological Factors; Humans; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Infliximab
PubMed: 34797516
DOI: 10.1007/s40259-021-00507-5 -
Journal of Reproductive Immunology Feb 2023This systematic review and meta-analysis were designed to identify possible correlations between isolated serum antinuclear antibody (ANA) and (i) infertility in the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review and meta-analysis were designed to identify possible correlations between isolated serum antinuclear antibody (ANA) and (i) infertility in the context of in-vitro fertilization (IVF), (ii) idiopathic recurrent pregnancy losses (RPL), and (iii) second/ third trimester pregnancy complications. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature in PubMed Library database from inception to March 2022 following PRISMA guidelines. Our pooled results showed a lower pregnancy rate among ANA-positive women undergoing IVF/ICSI compared to ANA-negative women undergoing the same procedures (279/908 versus 1136/2347, random effect, odds ratio -OR- 0.50, 95% confidence interval -CI- 0.38-0.67, p 0.00001, I = 58%). We also reported a higher miscarriage rate among ANA-positive compared to ANA-negative women (48/223 versus 109/999, random effect, OR: 3.25 95% CI: 1.57-6.76, p = 0.002, I = 61%) and a lower implantation rate (320/1489 versus 1437/4205, random effect, OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.36-0.72, p = 0.0001, I = 78%). Regarding RPL, pooled results demonstrated a higher prevalence of ANA-positivity in RPL women compared to controls (698/2947 versus 240/3145, random effect, OR: 3.22, 95% CI: 2.12-4.88, p 0.00001, I 77%), either using > 2 or > 3 pregnancy losses threshold for defining RPL. Heterogeneity of reporting outcome did not allow a quantitative analysis and led to no clear demonstration of an effect of serum ANA on the incidence of stillbirth, preeclampsia and hypertensive disorders. In conclusion, the unfavorable effect of serum ANA was observed in women following IVF. Similarly, ANA were associated with the risk of RPL, while data were unconclusive in terms of late pregnancy complications.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Antibodies, Antinuclear; Embryo Implantation; Fertilization in Vitro; Pregnancy Rate; Abortion, Habitual; Infertility, Female
PubMed: 36621091
DOI: 10.1016/j.jri.2022.103794 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2022Anti-interferon-γ autoantibody (AIGA) positivity is an emerging immunodeficiency syndrome closely associated with intracellular infection in individuals without human...
BACKGROUND
Anti-interferon-γ autoantibody (AIGA) positivity is an emerging immunodeficiency syndrome closely associated with intracellular infection in individuals without human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). However, the information on epidemiology, pathogen spectrum, and immunotherapy among these patients lack a systematic description of large data.
METHODS
This systematic literature review and multicenter retrospective study aimed to describe the pathogen spectrum and review treatment strategies among patients with AIGA positivity.
RESULTS
We included 810 HIV-negative patients with AIGA positivity infected with one or more intracellular pathogens. Excluding four teenagers, all the patients were adults. The most common pathogen was nontuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) (676/810, 83.5%). A total of 765 NTM isolates were identified in 676 patients with NTM, including 342 (44.7%) rapid-grower mycobacteria, 273 (35.7%) slow-grower mycobacteria, and 150 (19.6%) unidentified NTM subtype. Even with long-term and intensive antimicrobial treatments, 42.6% of patients with AIGA positivity had recurrence and/or persistent infection. Sixty-seven patients underwent immunoregulatory or immunosuppressive therapy, and most (60) achieved remission. The most common treatment strategy was rituximab (27/67, 40.3%) and cyclophosphamide (22/67, 32.8%), followed by cyclophosphamide combined with glucocorticoids (8/67, 11.9%).
CONCLUSIONS
Intracellular pathogen was the most common infection in patients with AIGA positivity. The predominant infection phenotypes were NTM, varicella-zoster virus, , and spp., with or without other opportunistic infections. AIGA immunotherapy, including rituximab or cyclophosphamide, has yielded good preliminary results in some cases.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Adolescent; Retrospective Studies; Mycobacterium Infections, Nontuberculous; Autoantibodies; Rituximab; Nontuberculous Mycobacteria; Immunotherapy; Cyclophosphamide; HIV Infections; Multicenter Studies as Topic
PubMed: 36569827
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.1051673 -
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics Jun 2024The expanding options in advanced therapies for ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) present challenges in treatment selection. Persistence analysis assesses... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The expanding options in advanced therapies for ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) present challenges in treatment selection. Persistence analysis assesses drug durability in real-world settings, acting as a surrogate marker for medication efficacy and tolerance. Unlike traditional comparative studies, persistence analysis provides insights extending beyond the initial year of treatment.
AIM
To provide real-world evidence on treatment effectiveness, tolerability and preferences of physicians and patients regarding various advanced therapies for IBD.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of observational studies up to March 2023 assessing advanced therapies' persistence in UC and CD. Advanced therapies under examination included infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, golimumab, certolizumab and tofacitinib. We pooled the persistence of each agent and conducted a meta-analysis to compare the persistence of newer agents with traditional TNF inhibitors (TNFi)-specifically infliximab and adalimumab.
RESULTS
Among 63 observational studies, vedolizumab had the highest 1-year persistence in UC (73.8%, 95% CI: 70.0%-77.6%) and ustekinumab in CD (77.5%, 95% CI: 72.9%-82.1%). Compared to TNFi, vedolizumab demonstrated increased persistence with a relative risk (RR) of 1.30 (95% CI: 1.19-1.41) for UC and 1.14 (95% CI: 1.09-1.20) for CD at 1 year, while ustekinumab demonstrated a RR of 1.15 (95% CI: 1.07-1.23) for CD at 1 year. Vedolizumab exhibited sustained increased persistence in UC over 2 years compared to TNFi (RR: 1.33, 95% CI 1.14-1.54).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis highlights the superior persistence of ustekinumab and vedolizumab over TNFi, and offers valuable insights for clinicians navigating the challenging landscape of UC and CD therapeutic choices.
Topics: Humans; Gastrointestinal Agents; Ustekinumab; Crohn Disease; Colitis, Ulcerative; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Treatment Outcome; Observational Studies as Topic; Infliximab; Piperidines; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Pyrimidines
PubMed: 38651771
DOI: 10.1111/apt.18006 -
American Journal of Otolaryngology 2022Biologic medications are novel therapeutics in the treatment of Autoimmune Inner Ear Disease (AIED), an etiology of Sensorineural Hearing Loss (SNHL). The goal of this... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Biologic medications are novel therapeutics in the treatment of Autoimmune Inner Ear Disease (AIED), an etiology of Sensorineural Hearing Loss (SNHL). The goal of this study is to review the currently available literature on the efficacy of biologic medications on autoimmune-mediated hearing loss and associated symptomology among patients with AIED.
METHODS
A systematic review of Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases was conducted to identify studies investigating the impact of biologic medications on hearing outcomes. Bias assessment was independently conducted by three authors and studies were stratified based on risk of bias.
RESULTS
Of 174 unique abstracts screened, 12 articles met inclusion criteria for formal review. One randomized control trial, seven prospective cohort studies, and four retrospective cohort studies were included. Seven biologic medications, Etanercept, Infliximab, Adalimumab, Golimumab, Rituximab, Anakinra, and Canakinumab, were identified targeting three unique molecular targets, TNF-α, CD20, and IL-1.
CONCLUSION
The effects of biologic medications in treating SNHL was highly variable without clear efficacy of a drug or drug category, likely due to rarity of disease, multifactorial etiologies of AIED, and cohort heterogeneity. However, several medications alleviate symptoms associated with AIED, such as vertigo and tinnitus. While biologic medications may be promising therapeutics in AIED patients, the evidence is currently inconclusive. Large-scale randomized control trials and prospective cohort reviews are required to establish the efficacy of biologic medications in treating hearing loss.
Topics: Adalimumab; Autoimmune Diseases; Biological Products; Etanercept; Humans; Infliximab; Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist Protein; Interleukin-1; Labyrinth Diseases; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Rituximab; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
PubMed: 35963108
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2022.103576 -
Reviews in Medical Virology May 2022Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a major health problem. A better understanding of the geographical and temporal dynamics of RSV circulation will assist in tracking... (Review)
Review
Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a major health problem. A better understanding of the geographical and temporal dynamics of RSV circulation will assist in tracking resistance against therapeutics currently under development. Since 2015, the field of RSV molecular epidemiology has evolved rapidly with around 20-30 published articles per year. The objective of this systematic review is to identify knowledge gaps in recent RSV genetic literature to guide global molecular epidemiology research. We included 78 studies published between 2015 and 2020 describing 12,998 RSV sequences of which 8,233 (63%) have been uploaded to GenBank. Seventeen (22%) studies were performed in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and seven (9%) studies sequenced whole-genomes. Although most reported polymorphisms for monoclonal antibodies in clinical development (nirsevimab, MK-1654) have not been tested for resistance in neutralisation essays, known resistance was detected at low levels for the nirsevimab and palivizumab binding site. High resistance was found for the suptavumab binding site. We present the first literature review of an enormous amount of RSV genetic data. The need for global monitoring of RSV molecular epidemiology becomes increasingly important in evaluating the effectiveness of monoclonal antibody candidates as they reach their final stages of clinical development. We have identified the following three knowledge gaps: whole-genome data to study global RSV evolution, data from LMICs and data from global surveillance programs.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antiviral Agents; Humans; Palivizumab; Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections; Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human
PubMed: 34543489
DOI: 10.1002/rmv.2284 -
Journal For Immunotherapy of Cancer Jan 2024Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment has become an important therapeutic option for various cancer types. Although the treatment is effective, ICI can...
Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment has become an important therapeutic option for various cancer types. Although the treatment is effective, ICI can overstimulate the patient's immune system, leading to potentially severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs), including hepatitis, colitis, pneumonitis and myocarditis. The initial mainstay of treatments includes the administration of corticosteroids. There is little evidence how to treat steroid-resistant (sr) irAEs. It is mainly based on small case series or single case reports. This systematic review summarizes available evidence about sr-irAEs. We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed. Additionally, we included European Society for Medical Oncology, Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer, National Comprehensive Cancer Network and American Society of Clinical Oncology Guidelines for irAEs in our assessment. The study population of all selected publications had to include patients with cancer who developed hepatitis, colitis, pneumonitis or myocarditis during or after an immunotherapy treatment and for whom corticosteroid therapy was not sufficient. Our literature search was not restricted to any specific cancer diagnosis. Case reports were also included. There is limited data regarding life-threatening sr-irAEs of colon/liver/lung/heart and the majority of publications are single case reports. Most publications investigated sr colitis (n=26), followed by hepatitis (n=21), pneumonitis (n=17) and myocarditis (n=15). There is most data for mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) to treat sr hepatitis and for infliximab, followed by vedolizumab, to treat sr colitis. Regarding sr pneumonitis there is most data for MMF and intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) while data regarding infliximab are conflicting. In sr myocarditis, most evidence is available for the use of abatacept or anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) (both with or without MMF) or ruxolitinib with abatacept. This review highlights the need for prompt recognition and treatment of sr hepatitis, colitis, pneumonitis and myocarditis. Guideline recommendations for sr situations are not defined precisely. Based on our search, we recommend-as first line treatment-(1) MMF for sr hepatitis, (2) infliximab for sr colitis, followed by vedolizumab, (3) MMF and IVIG for sr pneumonitis and (4) abatacept or ATG (both with or without MMF) or ruxolitinib with abatacept for sr myocarditis. These additional immunosuppressive agents should be initiated promptly if there is no sufficient response to corticosteroids within 3 days.
Topics: Humans; Abatacept; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Colitis; Hepatitis; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Infliximab; Mycophenolic Acid; Myocarditis; Neoplasms; Nitriles; Pneumonia; Pyrazoles; Pyrimidines
PubMed: 38233099
DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2023-007409 -
QJM : Monthly Journal of the... Nov 2021Interleukin-6 inhibitors showed promising results in observational trials of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Interleukin-6 inhibitors showed promising results in observational trials of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
AIM
To evaluate whether interleukin-6 inhibitor tocilizumab (TCZ) reduces mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients.
DESIGN
A systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TCZ vs. placebo/control, for treatment of adults with COVID-19. Primary outcome was 28-30 days all-cause mortality. Search was conducted up to 1 April 2021. Two independent reviewers screened citations, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled. We performed subgroup analysis for patients with critical illness and sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS
Eight RCTs were included, assessing 6481 patients with mostly severe non-critical COVID-19 infection. TCZ was associated with a reduction in all-cause 28-30-day mortality compared to placebo/control (RR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.96). Among the subgroup of critically ill patients no reduced mortality was demonstrated (RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.74-1.19). No mortality benefit with TCZ was demonstrated in trials that used steroids for >80% of patients. TCZ was associated with significantly reduced risk for mechanical ventilation (MV); for combined endpoint of death or MV and for intensive care unit (ICU) admission. No significant difference in adverse events was demonstrated. Risk of serious superinfection was significantly lower with TCZ (RR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.93).
CONCLUSION
The treatment with TCZ reduces 28-30 days all-cause mortality, ICU admission, superinfections, MV and the combined endpoint of death or MV. Among critically ill patients, and when steroids were used for most patients, no mortality benefit was demonstrated. Additional research should further define sub-groups that would benefit most and preferred timing of administration of TCZ in severe COVID-19.
Topics: Adult; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Humans; Respiration, Artificial; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 34010403
DOI: 10.1093/qjmed/hcab142 -
Infection Dec 2023Tocilizumab, a monoclonal IL-6 receptor blocker, is an effective agent for severe-to-critical cases of COVID-19; however, its target patients for the optimum use need to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Tocilizumab, a monoclonal IL-6 receptor blocker, is an effective agent for severe-to-critical cases of COVID-19; however, its target patients for the optimum use need to be detailed. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to define its effect among severely ill but non-intubated cases with COVID-19.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Medrxiv, and Biorxiv until February 13, 2022, for non-intubated cases, and included randomized-controlled trials (RCT) based on bias assessment. The primary outcomes were the requirement of invasive mechanical ventilation and mortality. Random effect and fixed-effect models were used. The heterogeneity was measured using the χ and I statistics, with χ p ≤ 0.05 and I ≥ 50% indicating the presence of significant heterogeneity. We registered the study to the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with the registration number CRD42021232575.
RESULTS
Among 261 articles, 11 RCTs were included. The pooled analysis of the 11 RCTs demonstrated that the rate of mortality was significantly lower in the tocilizumab group than in the control group (20.0% and 24.2%, OR: 0.84, 95% CI 0.73-0.96, and heterogeneity I = 0%. p = 0.82.). The mechanical ventilation rate was lower in the tocilizumab group than the control group (27% vs 35.2%, OR: 0.76, 95% CI 0.67-0.86, and heterogeneity I = 6%. p = 0.39).
CONCLUSION
Among non-intubated severe COVID-19 cases, tocilizumab reduces the risk of invasive mechanical ventilation and mortality compared to standard-of-care treatment.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Respiration, Artificial
PubMed: 37162716
DOI: 10.1007/s15010-023-02047-2