scholarly journals Immunosuppressive agents for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review of clinical trials and their current development stage

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 1759720X2095997
Author(s):  
Julien Blaess ◽  
Julia Walther ◽  
Arthur Petitdemange ◽  
Jacques-Eric Gottenberg ◽  
Jean Sibilia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Immunosuppressive Agents ◽  
Development Stage ◽  
Clinical Development ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Current Development ◽  
To Come ◽  
New Treatments

Aims: With the arrival of conventional synthetic (csDMARDs), biological (bDMARDS) and then targeted synthetic (tsDMARDs) disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, the therapeutic arsenal against rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has recently expanded. However, there are still some unmet needs for patients who do not achieve remission and continue to worsen despite treatments. Of note, most randomized controlled trials show that, for methotrexate-inadequate responders, only 20% of patients are ACR70 responders. With our better understanding of RA pathogenesis, finding new treatments is a necessary challenge. The objective of our study was to analyse the whole pipeline of immunosuppressive and immunomodulating drugs evaluated in RA and describe their mechanisms of action and stage of clinical development. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of all drugs in clinical development in RA, in 17 online registries of clinical trials. Results: The search yielded 4652 trials, from which we identified 243 molecules. Those molecules belong to csDMARDs ( n = 22), bDMARDs ( n = 118), tsDMARDs ( n = 103). Twenty-four molecules are already marketed in RA in at least one country: eight csDMARDs, 10 bDMARDs and six tsDMARDs. Molecules under current development are mainly bDMARDs ( n = 34) and tsDMARDs ( n = 33). Seven of those have reached phase III. A large number of molecules (150/243, 61.7%) have been withdrawn. Conclusion: Despite the availability of 24 marketed molecules, the development of new targeted molecules is ongoing with a total of 243 molecules in RA. With seven molecules currently reaching phase III, we can expect an increase in the armamentarium in the years to come.

scholarly journals AB0332 IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AND IMMONOMODULATING AGENTS IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF CLINICAL TRIALS AND THEIR CURRENT DEVELOPMENT STAGE

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1464.1-1465
Author(s):  
J. Blaess ◽  
J. Walther ◽  
J. E. Gottenberg ◽  
J. Sibilia ◽  
L. Arnaud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
B Cells ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Clinical Development ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Jak Inhibitors ◽  
Exclusion Criteria ◽  
Immunomodulating Drugs

Background:Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the most frequent chronic inflammatory diseases with an incidence of 0.5% to 1%. Therapeutic arsenal of RA has continuously expanded in recent years with the recent therapeutic progress with the arrival of conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), biological (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic (tsDMARDs), JAK inhibitors. However, there are still some unmet needs for patients who do not achieve remission and who continue to worsen despite treatments. Of note, only approximately 40% of patients are ACR70 responders, in most randomized controlled trials. For these patients, finding new therapeutic avenues is challenging.Objectives:The objective of our study was to analyze the whole pipeline of immunosuppressive and immunomodulating drugs evaluated in RA and describe their mechanisms of action and stage of clinical development.Methods:We conducted a systematic review of all drug therapies in clinical development in RA in 17 databases of international clinical trials. Inclusion criterion: study from one of the databases using the keywords “Rheumatoid arthritis” (search date: June 1, 2019). Exclusion criteria: non-drug trials, trials not related to RA or duplicates. We also excluded dietary regimen or supplementations, cellular therapies, NSAIDs, glucorticoids or their derivatives and non-immunosuppressive or non-immunomodulating drugs. For each csDMARD, bDMARD and tsDMARD, we considered the study at the most advanced stage. For bDMARDs, we did not take into account biosimilars.Results:The research identified 4652 trials, of which 242 for 243 molecules met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The developed molecules belong to csDMARDs (n=21), bDMARDs (n=117), tsDMARDs (n=105).Among the 21 csDMARDs molecules: 8 (38%) has been withdrawn, 4 (19%) are already labelled in RA (hydroxychloroquine, leflunomide, methotrexate and sulfasalazine) and 9 (43%) are in development: 1 (11%) is in phase I/II, 5 (56%) in phase II, 3 (33%) in phase IV.Among the 117 bDMARDs molecules: 69 (59%) has been withdrawn, 9 (8%) are labeled in RA (abatacept, adalimumab, anakinra, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, rituximab, sarilumab, tocilizumab) and 39 (33%) are in development: 9 (23%) in phase I, 3 (8%) in phase I/II, 21 (54%) in phase II, 5 (12%) are in phase III, 1 (3%) in phase IV. bDMARDs currently under development target B cells (n=4), T cells (n=2), T/B cells costimulation (n=2),TNF alpha (n=2), Interleukine 1 or his receptor (n=3), Interleukine 6 or his receptor (n=7), Interleukine 17 (n=4), Interleukine 23 (n=1), GM-CSF (n=1), other cytokines or chemokines (n=5), integrins or adhesion proteins (n=3), interferon receptor (n=1) and various other targets (n=4).Among the 105 tsDMARDs molecules: 64 (61%) has been withdrawn, 6 (6%) JAK inhibitors, have just been or will probably soon be labelled (baricitinib, filgotinib, peficitinib, tofacitinib and upadacitinib), 35 (33%) are in development: 8 (24%) in phase I, 26 (74%) in phase II, 1 (3%) in phase III and. tsDMARDs currently under development target tyrosine kinase (n=12), janus kinase (JAK) (n=3), sphingosine phostate (n=3), PI3K pathway (n=1), phosphodiesterase-4 (n=3) B cells signaling pathways (n=3) and various other targets (n=10).Conclusion:A total of 242 therapeutic trials involving 243 molecules have been or are being evaluated in RA. This development does not always lead to new treatments since 141 (58%) have already been withdrawn. Hopefully, some of the currently evaluated drugs will contribute to improve the therapeutic management of RA patients, requiring a greater personalization of therapeutic strategies, both in the choice of molecules and their place in therapeutic sequences.Disclosure of Interests:Julien Blaess: None declared, Julia Walther: None declared, Jacques-Eric Gottenberg Grant/research support from: BMS, Pfizer, Consultant of: BMS, Sanofi-Genzyme, UCB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Eli Lilly and Co., Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, UCB, Jean Sibilia: None declared, Laurent Arnaud: None declared, Renaud FELTEN: None declared

scholarly journals Bee venom acupuncture for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials

BMJ Open ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (11) ◽  
pp. e006140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ju Ah Lee ◽  
Mi Ju Son ◽  
Jiae Choi ◽  
Ji Hee Jun ◽  
Jong-In Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Bee Venom ◽  
Randomised Clinical Trials ◽  
Bee Venom Acupuncture

Reno-vascular toxicities associated with carfilzomib: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21622-e21622
Author(s):  
Chintan Shah ◽  
Harini Bejjanki ◽  
Rohit Bishnoi ◽  
Ankur Jain ◽  
Subhankar Samal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effect ◽  
Random Effect Model ◽  
Dose Effect ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Phase Iii Clinical Trials

e21622 Background: Carfilzomib (Carf) is a novel proteasome inhibitor that is approved for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (RMM) who have failed ≥ 1 prior lines of therapy. The incidence and seriousness of Carf associated reno-vascular toxicities (RVT) is not well known. We performed systematic review of Carf literature with meta-analysis to determine its incidence and overall risk. Methods: Initial search of literature led to a total of 175 Carf related articles. However, we used a total of 29 publications; phase I/II, phase II and phase III clinical trials (n = 3) which used Carf as monotherapy or in combination. We excluded phase I studies. Incidence rates and odds ratios (OR) were calculated with either fixed effect or random effect model based on the heterogeneity of included studies. Toxicity such as hypertension (HTN), renal failure (RF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) were reported according to CTCAE v4.0. Results: A total of 4560 patients with various hematological and solid malignancies were included. Incidences of toxicities were: 15.9% and 4.7 % for HTN, 11.2% and 3.44% for RF, 6.47% and 2.22% for VTE, respectively for all grades and high grades in each category. When compared to control group taken from phase III clinical trials, the risk of HTN and RF due to Carf was significantly higher [OR = 2.91 and 3.32 in HTN (P < 0.001)], [OR = 1.71 and 1.79 (P < 0.05) for RF], respectively for all grade and high grade in each category. Moreover, incidence of HTN with higher than standard dose of carf (27 mg/m2 twice weekly) was significantly higher (P < 0.001). RF and VTE did not have the dose effect. Concomitant use of immunomodulator (IMiD) significantly increased, as expected, the incidence of VTE (P < 0.001). There was no variation in the incidence of RVT among newly diagnosed versus RMM (P = 0.4). Conclusions: Overall incidence and risk of hypertension and renal toxicities seems to be high when using Carf. Higher doses of Carf seem to lead to higher incidence of HTN, while the risk of VTE is higher with concomitant IMiD use. The pathophysiology for these complications is poorly understood, however it could be secondary to endothelial effect of carf. Physician should be vigilant about these effects as it can lead to poor overall outcomes.

scholarly journals Low immunogenicity of tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

2016 ◽  
Vol 76 (6) ◽  
pp. 1078-1085 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerd R Burmester ◽  
Ernest Choy ◽  
Alan Kivitz ◽  
Atsushi Ogata ◽  
Min Bao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Safety Study ◽  
Phase Iii Clinical Trials ◽  
Injection Site Reactions ◽  
Antidrug Antibody

ObjectiveSubcutaneous (SC) and intravenous formulations of tocilizumab (TCZ) are available for the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), based on the efficacy and safety observed in clinical trials. Anti-TCZ antibody development and its impact on safety and efficacy were evaluated in adult patients with RA treated with intravenous TCZ (TCZ-IV) or TCZ-SC as monotherapy or in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs).MethodsData from 5 TCZ-SC and 8 TCZ-IV phase III clinical trials and 1 TCZ-IV clinical pharmacology safety study (>50 000 samples) were pooled to assess the immunogenicity profile of TCZ-SC and TCZ-IV (8974 total patients). The analysis included antidrug antibody (ADA) measurement following TCZ-SC or TCZ-IV treatment as monotherapy or in combination with csDMARDs, after dosing interruptions or in TCZ-washout samples, and the correlation of ADAs with clinical response, adverse events or pharmacokinetics (PK).ResultsThe proportion of patients who developed ADAs following TCZ-SC or TCZ-IV treatment was 1.5% and 1.2%, respectively. ADA development was also comparable between patients who received TCZ monotherapy and those who received concomitant csDMARDs (0.7–2.0%). ADA development did not correlate with PK or safety events, including anaphylaxis, hypersensitivity or injection-site reactions, and no patients who developed ADAs had loss of efficacy.ConclusionsThe immunogenicity risk of TCZ-SC and TCZ-IV treatment was low, either as monotherapy or in combination with csDMARDs. Anti-TCZ antibodies developed among the small proportion of patients had no evident impact on PK, efficacy or safety.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Chemotherapeutic Regimens for Mantle Cell Lymphoma: A Systematic Review of Phase III Trials

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 6-7
Author(s):  
Ali Jaan ◽  
Muhammad Tayyeb ◽  
Farhan Khalid ◽  
Muhammad Khawar Sana ◽  
Zahoor Ahmed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Interferon Alfa ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Combination Regimens

Background: The mainstay treatment for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is chemotherapy ± immunotherapy. The standard chemotherapeutic regimens have limited efficacy in MCL when used alone. In this systematic review, we have assessed the efficacy and safety of various combination regimens for the treatment of MCL evaluated in phase III clinical trials. Methods: We performed a comprehensive systematic literature search on PubMed, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, and Web of Science databases with the date of inception to May 2020. We used MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms for "mantle cell lymphoma", "treatment outcome" along with their keywords, and combined their results. Our search generated a total of 3572 articles. After excluding case reports, case series, observational studies, review articles, meta-analysis, phase I/II clinical trials, and pre-clinical studies, we included five phase III randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting the efficacy of combination regimens for MCL treatment. Results Data from five phase III RCTs was pooled with total N=1683 (newly diagnosed (ND), n=1242, relapsed/refractory (RR), n=441). 1610 patients were evaluable. Kluin-Nelemans et al. 2020 (n=560) studied induction with R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) vs R-FC (rituximab, fludarabine, and cyclophosphamide) for ND-MCL with follow-up on maintenance with rituximab (R) -vs interferon alfa. At a median follow up of 7.6 years (y), median overall survival (mOS) was 6.4 vs 3.9 y (p=0.0054) in R-CHOP vs R-FC group, respectively. The median progression-free survival (mPFS) and mOS in the R-CHOP cohort on R maintenance were significantly better when compared to those on interferon alfa maintenance (mPFS, 5.4 y vs 1.9 y, p&lt;0.001) (mOS, 9.8 y vs 7.1 y, p=0.0026). Robak et al. (2015) (n=487) assessed bortezomib in ND-MCL by substituting it for vincristine in the standard R-CHOP therapy. A cohort of MCL ineligible for stem cell transplant (SCT) was randomly assigned to either R-CHOP or VR-CAP (bortezomib replacing vincristine). At a median follow-up of 40 months (mo), mPFS was 24.7 mo vs 14.4 mo in VR-CAP vs R-CHOP (HR 0.63, p&lt;0.001), respectively. Similar, relative improvements were reported in complete response (CR) (53% vs 42%, p=0.007) and 4-year OS was (64% [95% CI 56-71] vs 54% [95% CI 45-62]). Jin et al. (2018) (n=121) assessed R-CHOP vs VR-CAP in ND-MCL patients ineligible for SCT. After a median follow-up of 42.4 mo, mPFS for VR-CAP was better than R-CHOP (28.6 mo vs 13.9 mo, HR=0.7, p=0.157). The overall response rate (ORR) was almost similar in VR-CAP (97%) and R-CHOP (98%). The 4-year OS was 62% vs 61% in VR-CAP vs R-CHOP, respectively. Flinn et al. (2014) (n=74) studied the efficacy of bendamustine in combination with rituximab (BR) vs R-CHOP or R-CVP (R-CHOP minus doxorubicin) as induction regimens in ND-MCL. 36 patients received BR and 38 patients received R-CHOP/R-CVP. ORR was 94% vs 85% with BR vs R-CHOP/R-CVP, respectively. Hess et al. (2009) (n=162) evaluated temsirolimus in RR-MCL. The study population was randomized to either 175/75mg temsirolimus (arm A), 175/25mg temsirolimus (arm B), and the investigator's choice of chemotherapy (arm C). The mPFS was significantly better in arm A compared to arm C (4.8 mo vs 1.9 mo, HR 0.44 [97.5% CI 0.25-0.7], p=0.0009). Arm B had slight improvement but insignificant. Similarly, mOS was 12.8 mo in arm A (HR 0.8 [95% CI 0.5-1.28], p=0.35), and 8.8 in arm B (HR 0.96 [95% CI 0.60-1.54], p=0.87), when compared to 9.5 mo in arm C. Drelying et al. (2016) (n=280), studied temsirolimus in comparison with ibrutinib, RR-MCL with mPFS of 14.6 mo (95% CI 10.4-not estimable) vs 6.2 mo (95% CI 4.2-7.9), respectively. Toxicities were typically manageable. VR-CAP was associated with a higher incidence of toxicity (100%) vs R-CHOP (94%) majority of which was hematological. Thrombocytopenia was particularly more prominent with temsirolimus. Granulocytopenia was persistent in 30-40% in the R-FC cohort after 5 y. Conclusion: The chemo-immunotherapy combination is favorable compared to chemotherapy alone for the treatment of MCL. R-CHOP induction followed by rituximab maintenance in MCL shows favorable long-term safety and efficacy profile. Bortezomib substituting for vincristine in R-CHOP improves the efficacy outcomes. Ibrutinib-based regimens are superior to temsirolimus-based regimens. Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.:Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document