-
The European Respiratory Journal Jun 2023Standard of care for interstitial lung disease (ILD) with a nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP) pattern proposes mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) as one of the... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Standard of care for interstitial lung disease (ILD) with a nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP) pattern proposes mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) as one of the first-step therapies while rituximab is used as rescue therapy.
METHODS
In a randomised, double-blind, two-parallel group, placebo-controlled trial (NCT02990286), patients with connective tissue disease-associated ILD or idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (with or without autoimmune features) and a NSIP pattern (defined on NSIP pathological pattern or on integration of clinicobiological data and a NSIP-like high-resolution computed tomography pattern) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive rituximab (1000 mg) or placebo on day 1 and day 15 in addition to MMF (2 g daily) for 6 months. The primary end-point was the change in percent predicted forced vital capacity (FVC) from baseline to 6 months analysed by a linear mixed model for repeated measures analysis. Secondary end-points included progression-free survival (PFS) up to 6 months and safety.
FINDINGS
Between January 2017 and January 2019, 122 randomised patients received at least one dose of rituximab (n=63) or placebo (n=59). The least-squares mean change from baseline to 6 months in FVC (% predicted) was +1.60 (se 1.13) in the rituximab+MMF group and -2.01 (se 1.17) in the placebo+MMF group (between-group difference 3.60, 95% CI 0.41-6.80; p=0.0273). PFS was better in the rituximab+MMF group (crude hazard ratio 0.47, 95% CI 0.23-0.96; p=0.03). Serious adverse events occurred in 26 (41%) patients of the rituximab+MMF group and in 23 (39%) of the placebo+MMF group. Nine infections were reported in the rituximab+MMF group (five bacterial infections, three viral infections, one other) and four bacterial infections in the placebo+MMF group.
INTERPRETATION
Combination of rituximab and MMF was superior to MMF alone in patients with ILD and a NSIP pattern. The use of this combination must take into consideration the risk of viral infection.
Topics: Humans; Rituximab; Mycophenolic Acid; Immunosuppressive Agents; Lung; Treatment Outcome; Lung Diseases, Interstitial; Idiopathic Interstitial Pneumonias; Double-Blind Method
PubMed: 37230499
DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02071-2022 -
Advances in Therapy Oct 2017Rituximab is a human/murine, chimeric anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody with established efficacy, and a favorable and well-defined safety profile in patients with various... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
Rituximab is a human/murine, chimeric anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody with established efficacy, and a favorable and well-defined safety profile in patients with various CD20-expressing lymphoid malignancies, including indolent and aggressive forms of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Since its first approval 20 years ago, intravenously administered rituximab has revolutionized the treatment of B-cell malignancies and has become a standard component of care for follicular lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and mantle cell lymphoma. For all of these diseases, clinical trials have demonstrated that rituximab not only prolongs the time to disease progression but also extends overall survival. Efficacy benefits have also been shown in patients with marginal zone lymphoma and in more aggressive diseases such as Burkitt lymphoma. Although the proven clinical efficacy and success of rituximab has led to the development of other anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies in recent years (e.g., obinutuzumab, ofatumumab, veltuzumab, and ocrelizumab), rituximab is likely to maintain a position within the therapeutic armamentarium because it is well established with a long history of successful clinical use. Furthermore, a subcutaneous formulation of the drug has been approved both in the EU and in the USA for the treatment of B-cell malignancies. Using the wealth of data published on rituximab during the last two decades, we review the preclinical development of rituximab and the clinical experience gained in the treatment of hematologic B-cell malignancies, with a focus on the well-established intravenous route of administration. This article is a companion paper to A. Davies, et al., which is also published in this issue.
FUNDING
F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Basel, Switzerland.
Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; B-Lymphocytes; Hematologic Neoplasms; History, 20th Century; History, 21st Century; Humans; Lymphoma, B-Cell; Rituximab
PubMed: 28983798
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-017-0612-x -
Frontiers in Immunology 2019During the past years biologic agents (also termed biologicals or biologics) have become a crucial treatment option in immunological diseases. Numerous articles have...
During the past years biologic agents (also termed biologicals or biologics) have become a crucial treatment option in immunological diseases. Numerous articles have been published on biologicals, which complicates the decision making process on the use of the most appropriate biologic for a given immune-mediated disease. This systematic review is the first of a series of articles assessing the safety and efficacy of B cell-targeting biologics for the treatment of immune-mediated diseases. To evaluate rituximab's safety and efficacy for the treatment of immune-mediated disorders compared to placebo, conventional treatment, or other biologics. The PRISMA checklist guided the reporting of the data. We searched the PubMed database between 4 October 2016 and 26 July 2018 concentrating on immune-mediated disorders. The literature search identified 19,665 articles. After screening titles and abstracts against the inclusion and exclusion criteria and assessing full texts, 105 articles were finally included in a narrative synthesis. Rituximab is both safe and effective for the treatment of acquired angioedema with C1-inhibitor deficiency, ANCA-associated vasculitis, autoimmune hemolytic anemia, Behçet's disease, bullous pemphigoid, Castleman's disease, cryoglobulinemia, Goodpasture's disease, IgG4-related disease, immune thrombocytopenia, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, myasthenia gravis, nephrotic syndrome, neuromyelitis optica, pemphigus, rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthropathy, and systemic sclerosis. Conversely, rituximab failed to show an effect for antiphospholipid syndrome, autoimmune hepatitis, IgA nephropathy, inflammatory myositis, primary-progressive multiple sclerosis, systemic lupus erythematosus, and ulcerative colitis. Finally, mixed results were reported for membranous nephropathy, primary Sjögren's syndrome and Graves' disease, therefore warranting better quality trials with larger patient numbers.
Topics: Animals; Antigens, CD20; B-Lymphocytes; Disease Progression; Humans; Immune System Diseases; Immunotherapy; Lymphocyte Depletion; Rituximab; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31555262
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.01990 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2022Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common autoimmune subepidermal bullous disease of the skin. First-line treatment of systemic corticosteroids may cause serious...
BACKGROUND
Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common autoimmune subepidermal bullous disease of the skin. First-line treatment of systemic corticosteroids may cause serious adverse events. Rituximab, omalizumab, and dupilumab should be explored as alternative treatment options to improve outcomes.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the rituximab, omalizumab, and dupilumab treatment outcomes in bullous pemphigoid.
METHODS
A PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane library search were conducted on March 10, 2022. A total of 75 studies were included using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines.
RESULTS
Use of rituximab (n=122), omalizumab (n=53) and dupilumab (n=36) were reported in 211 patients with BP. Rituximab led to complete remission in 70.5% (n=86/122) and partial remission in 23.8% (n=29/122) of patients within 5.7 months, with a recurrence rate of 20.5% (n=25/122). 9.0% (n=11/122) of patients died and infection (6.6%, n=8/122) was the most common adverse event. Omalizumab led to complete remission in 67.9% (n=36/53) and partial remission in 20.8% (n=11/53) of patients within 6.6 months, with a recurrence rate of 5.7% (n=3/53). 1.9% (n=1/53) of patients died and thrombocytopenia (1.9%, n=1/53) was observed as the most common adverse event. Dupilumab led to complete remission in 66.7% (n=24/36) and partial remission in 19.4% (n=7/36) of patients within 4.5 months of treatment without any reported adverse events, with a recurrence rate of 5.6% (n=2/36).
CONCLUSIONS
Rituximab, omalizumab, and dupilumab have similar clinical benefits for BP patients. However, rituximab resulted in higher recurrence rates, adverse events, and mortality rates.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022316454.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Humans; Omalizumab; Pemphigoid, Bullous; Rituximab; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35769474
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.928621 -
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official... Jun 2017Purpose There is no consensus on the optimal systemic treatment of patients with extranodal marginal zone lymphoma of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue. The IELSG-19... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Final Results of the IELSG-19 Randomized Trial of Mucosa-Associated Lymphoid Tissue Lymphoma: Improved Event-Free and Progression-Free Survival With Rituximab Plus Chlorambucil Versus Either Chlorambucil or Rituximab Monotherapy.
Purpose There is no consensus on the optimal systemic treatment of patients with extranodal marginal zone lymphoma of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue. The IELSG-19 phase III study, to our knowledge, was the first such study to address the question of first-line treatment in a randomized trial. Patients and Methods Eligible patients were initially randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive either chlorambucil monotherapy (6 mg/m/d orally on weeks 1 to 6, 9 to 10, 13 to 14, 17 to 18, and 21 to 22) or a combination of chlorambucil (same schedule as above) and rituximab (375 mg/m intravenously on day 1 of weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 13, 17, and 21). After the planned enrollment of 252 patients, the protocol was amended to continue with a three-arm design (1:1:6 ratio), with a new arm that included rituximab alone (same schedule as the combination arm) and with a final sample size of 454 patients. The main end point was event-free survival (EFS). Analysis of chlorambucil versus the combination arm was performed and reported separately before any analysis of the third arm. Results At a median follow-up of 7.4 years, addition of rituximab to chlorambucil led to significantly better EFS (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.77). EFS at 5 years was 51% (95% CI, 42 to 60) with chlorambucil alone, 50% (95% CI, 42 to 59) with rituximab alone, and 68% (95% CI, 60 to 76) with the combination ( P = .0009). Progression-free survival was also significantly better with the combination ( P = .0119). Five-year overall survival was approximately 90% in each arm. All treatments were well tolerated. No unexpected toxicities were recorded. Conclusion Rituximab in combination with chlorambucil demonstrated superior efficacy in mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma; however, improvements in EFS and progression-free survival did not translate into longer overall survival.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Chlorambucil; Disease-Free Survival; Endpoint Determination; Female; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Lymphoma, B-Cell, Marginal Zone; Male; Middle Aged; Rituximab; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28355112
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.70.6994 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a systemic autoimmune disease characterized by thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity with the persistent presence of antiphospholipid... (Review)
Review
Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is a systemic autoimmune disease characterized by thrombosis and pregnancy morbidity with the persistent presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs). Although anticoagulation is the primary treatment for APS, it fails in approximately 20-30% of obstetric APS cases and more than 30% of thrombotic APS cases. Therefore, there is a need for new, targeted treatments beyond anticoagulants. Biologics, such as rituximab and eculizumab, have been recommended for refractory catastrophic APS. This review focuses on the recent advancements in the pathogenesis of APS and explores the potential of targeted treatments, including eculizumab, rituximab, belimumab, daratumumab, obinutuzumab, and anti-TNF-α antibodies, for APS management.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Antiphospholipid Syndrome; Rituximab; Biological Products; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors; Antibodies, Antiphospholipid; Thrombosis
PubMed: 37275894
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1145145 -
British Journal of Haematology Jul 2018While rituximab has dramatically improved outcomes for patients with CD20 malignancies for two decades, responses are not universal and resistance can develop.... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
While rituximab has dramatically improved outcomes for patients with CD20 malignancies for two decades, responses are not universal and resistance can develop. Obinutuzumab was developed to potentiate activity and overcome resistance. Pre-clinical data suggests obinutuzumab is superior to rituximab at effecting B cell depletion; however recent phase III clinical trial results have been mixed. The decision of which antibody to employ will probably be further complicated by the approval of a subcutaneous preparation of rituximab and several anti-CD20 biosimilars. Clinicians are now challenged with deciding whether to switch to obinutuzumab in approved settings, accepting the potential for increased toxicity and probable increased cost. The benefit conferred by obinutuzumab over rituximab may be context-specific and vary based on histological subtype and immune integrity. This comprehensive review will explore the preclinical differences, investigate the proposed pathogenesis of rituximab resistance, compare the employed dosing strategies and interrogate available clinical results to help inform practice.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Resistance, Neoplasm; Hematologic Neoplasms; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rituximab
PubMed: 29741753
DOI: 10.1111/bjh.15232 -
Journal of Neurology Jan 2022In the last decades, evidence suggesting the direct or indirect involvement of B cells on multiple sclerosis (MS) pathogenesis has accumulated. The increased amount of... (Review)
Review
In the last decades, evidence suggesting the direct or indirect involvement of B cells on multiple sclerosis (MS) pathogenesis has accumulated. The increased amount of data on the efficacy and safety of B-cell-depleting therapies from several studies has suggested the addition of these drugs as treatment options to the current armamentarium of disease modifying therapies (DMTs) for MS. Particularly, rituximab (RTX), a chimeric monoclonal antibody directed at CD20 positive B lymphocytes resulting in cell-mediated apoptosis, has been demonstrated to reduce inflammatory activity, incidence of relapses and new brain lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). Additional evidence also demonstrated that patients with progressive MS (PMS) may benefit from RTX, which also showed to be well tolerated, with acceptable safety risks and favorable cost-effectiveness profile.Despite these encouraging results, RTX is currently approved for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, several forms of vasculitis and rheumatoid arthritis, while it can only be administered off-label for MS treatment. Between Northern European countries exist different rules for using not licensed drug for treating MS. The Sweden MS register reports a high rate (53.5%) of off-label RTX prescriptions in relation to other annually started DMTs to treat MS patients, while Danish and Norwegian neurologists have to use other anti-CD20 drugs, as ocrelizumab, in most of the cases.In this paper, we review the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, clinical efficacy, safety profile and cost effectiveness aspects of RTX for the treatment of MS. Particularly, with the approval of new anti-CD20 DMTs, the recent worldwide COVID-19 emergency and the possible increased risk of infection with this class of drugs, this review sheds light on the use of RTX as an alternative treatment option for MS management, while commenting the gaps of knowledge regarding this drug.
Topics: Humans; Immunologic Factors; Multiple Sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Rituximab
PubMed: 33416999
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-020-10362-z -
JCI Insight Dec 2022BACKGROUNDPrimary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS) is characterized by B cell hyperactivity and elevated B-lymphocyte stimulator (BLyS). Anti-BLyS treatment (e.g., belimumab)... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUNDPrimary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS) is characterized by B cell hyperactivity and elevated B-lymphocyte stimulator (BLyS). Anti-BLyS treatment (e.g., belimumab) increases peripheral memory B cells; decreases naive, activated, and plasma B cell subsets; and increases stringency on B cell selection during reconstitution. Anti-CD20 therapeutics (e.g., rituximab) bind and deplete CD20-expressing B cells in circulation but are less effective in depleting tissue-resident CD20+ B cells. Combined, these 2 mechanisms may achieve synergistic effects.METHODSThis 68-week, phase II, double-blind study (GSK study 201842) randomized 86 adult patients with active pSS to 1 of 4 arms: placebo, s.c. belimumab, i.v. rituximab, or sequential belimumab + rituximab.RESULTSOverall, 60 patients completed treatment and follow-up until week 68. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) and drug-related AEs was similar across groups. Infections/infestations were the most common AEs, and no serious infections of special interest occurred. Near-complete depletion of minor salivary gland CD20+ B cells and a greater and more sustained depletion of peripheral CD19+ B cells were observed with belimumab + rituximab versus monotherapies. With belimumab + rituximab, reconstitution of peripheral B cells occurred, but it was delayed compared with rituximab. At week 68, mean (± standard error) total EULAR Sjögren's syndrome disease activity index scores decreased from 11.0 (1.17) at baseline to 5.0 (1.27) for belimumab + rituximab and 10.4 (1.36) to 8.6 (1.57) for placebo.CONCLUSIONThe safety profile of belimumab + rituximab in pSS was consistent with the monotherapies. Belimumab + rituximab induced enhanced salivary gland B cell depletion relative to the monotherapies, potentially leading to improved clinical outcomes.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicalTrials.gov NCT02631538.FUNDINGFunding was provided by GSK.
Topics: Humans; Rituximab; Sjogren's Syndrome
PubMed: 36477362
DOI: 10.1172/jci.insight.163030 -
Neurotherapeutics : the Journal of the... Apr 2022Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) comprises a heterogeneous group of disorders in which the host immune system targets self-antigens expressed in the central nervous system.... (Review)
Review
Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) comprises a heterogeneous group of disorders in which the host immune system targets self-antigens expressed in the central nervous system. The most conspicuous example is an anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis linked to a complex neuropsychiatric syndrome. Current treatment of AE is based on immunotherapy and has been established according to clinical experience and along the concept of a B cell-mediated pathology induced by highly specific antibodies to neuronal surface antigens. In general, immunotherapy for AE follows an escalating approach. When first-line therapy with steroids, immunoglobulins, and/or plasma exchange fails, one converts to second-line immunotherapy. Alkylating agents could be the first choice in this stage. However, due to their side effect profile, most clinicians give preference to monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) directed at B cells such as rituximab. Newer mAbs might be added as a third-line therapy in the future, or be given even earlier if shown effective. In this chapter, we will discuss mAbs targeting B cells (rituximab, ocrelizumab, inebulizumab, daratumumab), IL-6 (tocilizumab, satralizumab), the neonatal Fc receptor (FCRn) (efgartigimod, rozanolixizumab), and the complement cascade (eculizumab).
Topics: Anti-N-Methyl-D-Aspartate Receptor Encephalitis; Encephalitis; Hashimoto Disease; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Infant, Newborn; Rituximab
PubMed: 35060089
DOI: 10.1007/s13311-021-01178-4