-
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases Mar 2021To evaluate efficacy and safety of abatacept in adults with active primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS) in a phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate efficacy and safety of abatacept in adults with active primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS) in a phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
METHODS
Eligible patients (moderate-to-severe pSS [2016 ACR/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria], EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Disease Activity Index [ESSDAI] ≥5, anti-SS-related antigen A/anti-Ro antibody positive) received weekly subcutaneous abatacept 125 mg or placebo for 169 days followed by an open-label extension to day 365. Primary endpoint was mean change from baseline in ESSDAI at day 169. Key secondary endpoints were mean change from baseline in EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index (ESSPRI) and stimulated whole salivary flow (SWSF) at day 169. Other secondary clinical endpoints included glandular functions and patient-reported outcomes. Selected biomarkers and immune cell phenotypes were examined. Safety was monitored.
RESULTS
Of 187 patients randomised, 168 completed double-blind period and 165 continued into open-label period. Mean (SD) baseline ESSDAI and ESSPRI total scores were 9.4 (4.3) and 6.5 (2.0), respectively. Statistical significance was not reached for primary (ESSDAI -3.2 abatacept vs -3.7 placebo, p=0.442) or key secondary endpoints (ESSPRI, p=0.337; SWSF, p=0.584). No clinical benefit of abatacept over placebo at day 169 was seen with other clinical and PRO endpoints. Relative to baseline, abatacept was associated with significant differences vs placebo in some disease-relevant biomarkers (including IgG, IgA, IgM-rheumatoid factor) and pathogenic cell subpopulations (post hoc analyses). No new safety signals were identified.
CONCLUSIONS
Abatacept treatment did not result in significant clinical efficacy compared with placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe pSS, despite evidence of biological activity.
Topics: Abatacept; Humans; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Severity of Illness Index; Sjogren's Syndrome; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33168545
DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-218599 -
Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) Dec 2021Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a global threat to humanity. Its pathogenesis and different phases of disease progression are being elucidated under the... (Review)
Review
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a global threat to humanity. Its pathogenesis and different phases of disease progression are being elucidated under the pandemic. Active viral replication activates various immune cells and produces large amounts of inflammatory cytokines, which leads to the cytokine storm, a major cause of patient death. Therefore, viral inhibition is expected to be the most effective early in the course of the disease, while immunosuppressive treatment may be useful in the later stages to prevent disease progression. Based on the pathophysiology of rheumatic diseases, various immunomodulatory and immunosuppressive drugs are used for the diseases. Due to their mechanism of action, the antirheumatic drugs, including hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, colchicine, calcineurin inhibitors (e.g., cyclosporine A and tacrolimus), glucocorticoids, cytokines inhibitors, such as anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (e.g., infliximab), anti-interleukin (IL)-6 (e.g., tocilizumab, sarilumab, and siltuximab), anti-IL-1 (e.g., anakinra and canakinumab) and Janus kinase inhibitors (e.g., baricitinib and tofacitinib), cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 blockade agents (e.g., abatacept), and phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors (e.g., apremilast), have been tried as a treatment for COVID-19. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms of action and clinical impact of these agents in the management of COVID-19.
PubMed: 34959657
DOI: 10.3390/ph14121256 -
Blood Advances Jul 2023Reducing the incidence of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) after haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is warranted. Posttransplant...
Reducing the incidence of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) after haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is warranted. Posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) is the main agent used for GVHD prevention in this setting. It remains unknown whether costimulation blockade can be safely combined with PTCy and enhance its efficacy. We performed a phase 1b-2 clinical trial to examine the combination of PTCy, abatacept, and a short course of tacrolimus (CAST) after peripheral blood haploidentical HSCT. The primary end point was the incidence of grades 2-4 acute GVHD by day +120. The study enrolled 46 patients with a median age of 60 years (range, 18-74 years). The cumulative incidences of grades 2-4 and 3 or 4 acute GVHD were 17.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.2-32.9) and 4.4% (95% CI, 1.1-17.1), respectively. With a median follow-up of 15.3 months, the cumulative incidence of 1-year treatment-related mortality was 4.4% (95% CI, 1.1-17.1). The estimated 1-year moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD rate, relapse rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and GVHD- and relapse-free survival were 15.9% (95% CI, 8-31.7), 11.7% (95% CI, 5-27.2), 84.1% (95% CI, 73.8-95.7), 85.9% (95% CI, 75.9-97.2), and 66.1% (95% CI, 53.4-81.8), respectively. Toxicities were similar to those expected in patients receiving haploidentical HSCT. This clinical trial showed that the CAST regimen is safe and effective in reducing the rate of grades 2-4 acute GVHD after haploidentical peripheral blood HSCT. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT04503616.
Topics: Humans; Adolescent; Young Adult; Adult; Middle Aged; Aged; Tacrolimus; Abatacept; Transplantation, Haploidentical; Cyclophosphamide; Graft vs Host Disease
PubMed: 37163349
DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2023010545 -
Respiration; International Review of... 2020Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) associated with autoimmune or systemic disease are increasingly recognized and our pathophysiological understanding rapidly expanding.... (Review)
Review
Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) associated with autoimmune or systemic disease are increasingly recognized and our pathophysiological understanding rapidly expanding. Treatment modalities, however, are still mainly driven by established disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) where, despite decades of experience of their use in the underlying diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, mostly ret-rospective data exist informing their effect on the course of interstitial lung disease (ILD). In recent years, randomized trials investigating the effects of biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) have been completed or are currently running, generating new treatment options for often relentlessly progressive diseases. Herein, we summarize the evidence and current use of both synthetic DMARDs and bDMARDs in the context of ILDs associated with autoimmune/systemic disease.
Topics: Abatacept; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antirheumatic Agents; Autoimmune Diseases; Humans; Immunomodulation; Immunosuppressive Agents; Lung Diseases, Interstitial; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors
PubMed: 33271551
DOI: 10.1159/000511200 -
Current Opinion in Rheumatology Sep 2021Biologics and novel targeted therapeutics have transformed the management of pediatric rheumatic diseases over the past two decades; however, questions about short-term... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Biologics and novel targeted therapeutics have transformed the management of pediatric rheumatic diseases over the past two decades; however, questions about short-term and long-term safety remain. Safety data gathered from recent clinical trials, long-term extensions of prior trials, registries, and other real-world evidence are summarized here for biologics and novel therapeutics commonly prescribed for pediatric rheumatic diseases.
RECENT FINDINGS
With nearly 20 years of therapeutic experience, tumor necrosis inhibitors (TNFi) are generally well tolerated, although infections, malignancy, and development of new autoimmunity remain a concern. Risk of infections may be higher in IL-1 and IL-6 inhibitors, and lower in abatacept, compared with TNFi. Safety data for B-cell-targeted therapeutics and janus kinase inhibitors are emerging, but remain limited, especially in children.
SUMMARY
Biologic and novel targeted therapeutics offer a promising future for children with pediatric rheumatic disease. However, long-term safety data in children remain limited for several agents. With any therapeutic option, both short-term and long-term safety concerns must be weighed against individual clinical needs when choosing the optimal treatment for each child.
Topics: Abatacept; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Humans; Registries; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
PubMed: 34397604
DOI: 10.1097/BOR.0000000000000811 -
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases Jan 2024This study aims to evaluate non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) risk associated with abatacept treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
This study aims to evaluate non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) risk associated with abatacept treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
METHODS
This evaluation included 16 abatacept RA clinical trials and 6 observational studies. NMSC incidence rates (IRs)/1000 patient-years (p-y) of exposure were compared between patients treated with abatacept versus placebo, conventional synthetic (cs) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and other biological/targeted synthetic (b/ts)DMARDs. For observational studies, a random-effects model was used to pool rate ratios (RRs).
RESULTS
~49 000 patients receiving abatacept were analysed from clinical trials (~7000) and observational studies (~42 000). In randomised trials (n=4138; median abatacept exposure, 12 (range 2-30) months), NMSC IRs (95% CIs) were not significantly different for abatacept (6.0 (3.3 to 10.0)) and placebo (4.0 (1.3 to 9.3)) and remained stable throughout the long-term, open-label period (median cumulative exposure, 28 (range 2-130 months); 21 335 p-y of exposure (7044 patients over 3 years)). For registry databases, NMSC IRs/1000 p-y were 5-12 (abatacept), 1.6-10 (csDMARDs) and 3-8 (other b/tsDMARDs). Claims database IRs were 19-22 (abatacept), 15-18 (csDMARDs) and 14-17 (other b/tsDMARDs). Pooled RRs (95% CIs) from observational studies for NMSC in patients receiving abatacept were 1.84 (1.00 to 3.37) vs csDMARDs and 1.11 (0.98 to 1.26) vs other b/tsDMARDs.
CONCLUSIONS
Consistent with the warnings and precautions of the abatacept label, this analysis suggests a potential increase in NMSC risk with abatacept use compared with csDMARDs. No significant increase was observed compared with b/tsDMARDs, but the lower limit of the 95% CI was close to unity.
Topics: Humans; Abatacept; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Biological Products; Incidence; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin Neoplasms
PubMed: 37932010
DOI: 10.1136/ard-2023-224356 -
Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology Sep 2023Abatacept (Orencia) is a drug used to treat patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The agent improves patients' pain and joint inflammation through modulation of a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Abatacept (Orencia) is a drug used to treat patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The agent improves patients' pain and joint inflammation through modulation of a co-stimulatory signal necessary for T cell activation. We aimed to analyse the efficacy and safety of abatacept in the management of rheumatoid arthritis using the Cochrane systematic review.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic search among PubMed, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Web of Science, and Embase databases from the establishment of these databases to April 2022. The effectiveness and safety of abatacept in treating rheumatoid arthritis were assessed in terms of American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20/50/70/90 responses, Disease Activity Score-28 for Rheumatoid Arthritis with C-reactive protein (DAS-28-CRP), and adverse events. The Relative Risks (RRs) of relative safety and efficacy and their corresponding 95 confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compute the pooled assessments of the outcomes. We used the review manager software version 5.4 to analyse our data, and the PRISMA checklist 2020 was used to ensure that our work conforms with the specification of meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Our study included 13 randomised control trials with a total of 5978 adult patients from different geographic regions and races. Following the combined analysis of these enrolled studies, the RRs for ACR 20/50/70/90 responses were 1.57 [95%CI 1.27, 1.93], 1.84 [95%CI 1.38, 2.44], 2.36 [95%CI 1.60, 3.47], and 2.95 [95%CI 1.88, 4.63], respectively. Such findings suggest that abatacept-treated patients were 1.57, 1.84, 2.36, and 2.95 times more likely to achieve ACR 20/50/70/90 responses, respectively, than those treated with placebo, conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, and or other biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. An exclusive comparison of abatacept and other biologic/targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) indicated that participants who were treated with abatacept could achieve better ACR responses than those treated with other b/tsDMARDs. Adverse events were less seen in abatacept-treated patients than in those who were given other b/tsDMARDs.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis concludes that in adult with rheumatoid arthritis, abatacept can achieve better health outcomes than other biologic drugs.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Abatacept; Methotrexate; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Antirheumatic Agents; Biological Products; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36912326
DOI: 10.55563/clinexprheumatol/2xjg0d -
Scientific Reports Dec 2023Although biologics have their own characteristics, there are no clear criteria for selecting them to treat the patients with rheumatoid arthritis. To assist in selecting...
Although biologics have their own characteristics, there are no clear criteria for selecting them to treat the patients with rheumatoid arthritis. To assist in selecting biologics, we investigated the retention rates of biologics at our institution. We examined retention rates, and reasons for dropout for biologics in 393 cases and 605 prescriptions (of which 378 prescriptions were as naive) at our hospital since October 2003. Throughout the entire course of the study, etanercept (ETN) was the most frequently used biologic, followed by adalimumab (ADA) and tocilizumab (TCZ). When narrowed down to the later period from 2010, ETN was still the most used, followed by TCZ and abatacept (ABT). When the retention rates were compared in biologic naive patients, the retention rates were TCZ, ABT, ETN, certolizumab pegol (CZP), golimumab (GLM), infliximab (IFX), and ADA, in that order. The retention rates were better with the first use of each biologic. The main reasons for dropout were primary ineffectiveness, secondary ineffectiveness, and infection. ETN was the most used biologic in our hospital, with an increasing trend toward the use of non-TNF inhibitors. Retention rates were higher in non-TNF inhibitors.
Topics: Humans; Antirheumatic Agents; Biological Products; Treatment Outcome; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Etanercept; Adalimumab; Infliximab; Abatacept
PubMed: 38040839
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-48537-z -
Therapeutic Advances in Hematology 2023Administration of abatacept following transplantation has been reported to inhibit graft rejection and graft--host-disease (GvHD) in mouse models associated with... (Review)
Review
Administration of abatacept following transplantation has been reported to inhibit graft rejection and graft--host-disease (GvHD) in mouse models associated with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). This strategy has recently been adopted in clinical practice for GvHD prevention in human allogeneic HSCT and offers a unique approach to optimizing GvHD prophylaxis following alternative donor HSCTs. When combined with calcineurin inhibitors and methotrexate, abatacept had shown to be safe and effective in preventing moderate to severe acute GvHD in myeloablative HSCT using human leukocyte antigen (HLA) unrelated donors. Equivalent results are being reported in recent studies using alternative donors, in reduced-intensity conditioning HSCT and nonmalignant disorders. These observations have led to hypothesizing that even in the setting of increasing donor HLA disparity, abatacept when given with traditional GvHD prophylaxis does not worsen general outcomes. In addition, in limited studies, abatacept have being protective against the development of chronic GvHD through extended dosing and in the treatment of steroid-refractory chronic GvHD. This review summarized all the limited reports of this novels approach in the HSCT setting.
PubMed: 36845849
DOI: 10.1177/20406207231152644 -
The Journal of Experimental Medicine Jul 2023CD28 and CTLA4 are T cell coreceptors that competitively engage B7 ligands CD80 and CD86 to control adaptive immune responses. While the role of CTLA4 in restraining...
CD28 and CTLA4 are T cell coreceptors that competitively engage B7 ligands CD80 and CD86 to control adaptive immune responses. While the role of CTLA4 in restraining CD28 costimulatory signaling is well-established, the mechanism has remained unclear. Here, we report that human T cells acquire antigen-presenting-cell (APC)-derived B7 ligands and major histocompatibility complex (MHC) via trogocytosis through CD28:B7 binding. Acquired MHC and B7 enabled T cells to autostimulate, and this process was limited cell-intrinsically by CTLA4, which depletes B7 ligands trogocytosed or endogenously expressed by T cells through cis-endocytosis. Extending this model to the previously proposed extrinsic function of CTLA4 in human regulatory T cells (Treg), we show that blockade of either CD28 or CTLA4 attenuates Treg-mediated depletion of APC B7, indicating that trogocytosis and CTLA4-mediated cis-endocytosis work together to deplete B7 from APCs. Our study establishes CTLA4 as a cell-intrinsic molecular sink that limits B7 availability on the surface of T cells, with implications for CTLA4-targeted therapy.
Topics: Humans; CTLA-4 Antigen; CD28 Antigens; Antigens, CD; Ligands; Antigens, Differentiation; Abatacept; B7-2 Antigen; Membrane Glycoproteins; Immunoconjugates; B7-1 Antigen; Cell Adhesion Molecules
PubMed: 37042938
DOI: 10.1084/jem.20221391