scholarly journals Contribution of the Human Microbiome and Proteus mirabilis to Onset and Progression of Rheumatoid Arthritis: Potential for Targeted Therapy

Author(s):  
Jessica Kerpez ◽  
Marc Kesselman ◽  
Michelle Demory Beckler

The human microbiome has been shown to play a role in the regulation of human health, behavior, and disease. Data suggests that microorganisms that co-evolved within humans have an enhanced ability to prevent the development of a large spectrum of immune-related disorders but may also lead to the onset of conditions when homeostasis is disrupted. In many conditions, a link between dysbiosis (microbial imbalance or microbiome upset) has been identified and associated with immune conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This review provides insight into how an individual’s unique microbiome, combined with a genetic predisposition and environmental factors may lead to the onset and progression of RA. While research efforts have been largely focused on Porphyromonas gingivalis in the generation of citrullinated products as a trigger in the onset and progression of RA, recent research efforts have also indicated that Proteus mirabilis may play a key role in the development of anti-citrullinated antibodies through shared epitope sequences IRRET and ESRRAL. Thus, this review also highlights how targeting dysbiosis with alternative approaches may help to reduce microbial resistance as well as potentially improve outcomes. Further investigation is needed to see if potential future treatments for RA could benefit from personalized medicine based on an individual’s unique microbiome

Author(s):  
Karim Mowla ◽  
Elham Rajaee M. D. ◽  
Mehrdad Dargahi-MalAmir M. D. ◽  
Neda Yousefinezhad ◽  
Maryam Jamali Hondori

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis is a systemic multifactor disease that presented with symmetrical polyarthritis more preferably in small wrist joint and ankle. Synovial pannus cause destruction and deformities in joints. The main reason of this disease in unknown, but past researchesshowed that genetically factor play important role beside environmental factors in susceptibility to this entity. Method:100 patients with rheumatoid arthritis diagnosed upon ACR 2010 criteria enrolled study. 92 healthy patents also enrolled DNA studying. of both group was extracted through DNA extraction kits by blood sampling. HLA-DRB1 typing was done by PCR-SSP method. Results: There were no significant differences in HLADRB1 *04, HLADRB1*08 and HLADRB1*11 alleles presentation between patients and healthy controls. Only there were statically significant correlation between HLA-DRB1*08 and Rheumatoid factor positive patents. (P = 0.025).


2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
R Zunec ◽  
Z Grubic ◽  
D Babic-Naglic ◽  
N Laktasic-Zerjavic ◽  
K Potocki ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1872.1-1873
Author(s):  
S. H. Park ◽  
X. Han ◽  
F. Lobo ◽  
S. Nanji ◽  
D. Patel

Background:The shared epitope (SE) is a significant genetic risk factor for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and it has been proposed to be associated with T-cell activation and the production of anti-citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA).1-3The results from the Early AMPLE trial, a head-to-head trial comparing the efficacy of abatacept versus adalimumab among early moderate-to-severe RA patients with positive ACPA (ACPA+) and rheumatoid factor (RF), showed that at week 24, patients with SE positivity (SE+) responded better to abatacept compared to adalimumab across all efficacy measures evaluated (ACR20 [American College of Rheumatology], ACR50, ACR70, DAS[disease activity score]28-CRP[C-reactive protein]).4Objectives:To compare the cost per responder (CPR) between abatacept and adalimumab among RA patients with SE+ at week 24 using the Early AMPLE trial data from a United States (US) payer perspective.Methods:A CPR analysis was conducted for RA patients with SE+, ACPA+, and RF. Responders were defined as patients achieving ACR20, ACR50, ACR70, or DAS28-CRP ≤2.6 and efficacy data was sourced from the trial (Figure 1).4Approved product labels were referenced for treatment dosing regimen and wholesale acquisition cost was used to calculate pharmacy cost.5A real-world rebate scenario was considered for adalimumab (30%) to reflect the real-world pricing in the US market. The CPR was calculated as the total pharmacy cost divided by the proportion of responders.Results:The total pharmacy cost at week 24 was $26,273 per patient for abatacept and $21,731 per patient for adalimumab. With achieving ACR70 as the definition of responder, the CPR at 24-week was $46,337 for abatacept and $74,935 for adalimumab, a difference of $28,598 (Table 1). The CPR was consistently lower for abatacept compared to adalimumab across all clinical measures, with difference ranging from $7,099 to $43,609.Table 1.Overall cost per responder resultsAbataceptAdalimumabDifferenceACR20$30,303.74$37,403.06-$7,099.32ACR50$34,254.68$48,077.83-$13,823.15ACR70$46,337.46$74,935.10-$28,597.64DAS28-CRP ≤2.6$52,546.68$96,155.65-$43,608.97Conclusion:While the pharmacy cost was higher for abatacept compared to adalimumab driven by the rebate, due to its higher clinical efficacy, the CPR was consistently lower for SE+ RA patients treated with abatacept. The results may be useful for US healthcare decision makers in understanding how to optimize treatment for SE+ RA patient while minimizing costs in today’s budget constrained environment.References:[1]Gregersen PK, Silver J, Winchester RJ. The shared epitope hypothesis. An approach to understanding the molecular genetics of susceptibility to rheumatoid arthritis.Arthritis and rheumatism. 1987;30(11):1205-13.[2]Holoshitz J. The rheumatoid arthritis HLA-DRB1 shared epitope.Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2010;22(3):293-8.[3]Sakkas LI, Bogdanos DP, Katsiari C, et al. Anti-citrullinated peptides as autoantigens in rheumatoid arthritis-relevance to treatment.Autoimmun Rev. 2014;13(11):1114-20.[4]Fleischmann R, Weinblatt M, Ahmad H, et al. Efficacy of abatacept and adalimumab in patientsn with early rheumatoid arthritis with multiple poor prognostic factors: post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled clinical trial (AMPLE).Rheumatol Ther. 2019;6(4): 559-571.[5]Truven Health Analytics. Redbook online. Accessed October 11, 2019.Disclosure of Interests:Sang Hee Park Consultant of: Pharmerit International, which received consultancy fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb (US), Inc. for this study, Xue Han Employee of: BMS, Francis Lobo Shareholder of: Bristol-Myers Squibb (US), Employee of: Bristol-Myers Squibb (US), Sakina Nanji Consultant of: Pharmerit International, which received consultancy fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb (US), Inc. for this study, Dipen Patel Consultant of: Pharmerit International, which received consultancy fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb (US), Inc. for this study


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1096.3-1097
Author(s):  
S. Cohen ◽  
V. Strand ◽  
E. Connolly-Strong ◽  
J. Withers ◽  
L. Zhang ◽  
...  

Background:There is an urgent need for precision medicine in targeted therapy selection for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). TNF inhibitor (TNFi) therapies are the most prescribed targeted therapy for RA patients, yet the majority of patients fail to achieve a clinically meaningful response using this medication class. A blood-based molecular signature test evaluates RNA and clinical metrics to stratify RA patients based on their likelihood of having an inadequate response to TNFi therapies.1 Patients unlikely to respond to TNFi therapies can be directed to a different treatment option such as a JAK inhibitor, thus reducing the time needed to identify an effective therapy, improving confidence in and adherence to treatment, and increasing the patients’ chance of reaching treat-to-target goals.Objectives:High-titers of anti-cyclic citrillunated protein (anti-CCP) have been independently associated with reduced response to TNFi therapy;2 thus, we evaluated the ability of a blood-based molecular signature response classifier (MSRC) test to stratify RA patients by their likelihood of inadequate response to TNFi therapies – regardless of their positive or negative anti-CCP status.Methods:A subset of patients enrolled in the Network-04 prospective observational trial evaluating the ability of a molecular signature response classifier to stratify patients were subdivided into two groups based upon whether they were positive (N = 72) or negative (N = 74) for anti-CCP. The odds of inadequate response to TNFi therapies were calculated based on whether or not a patient had a molecular signature of non-response to TNFi therapy at baseline before the start of treatment. Odds ratios and confidence intervals were calculated3,4 to represent the strength of association between detecting the molecular signature of non-response and the patient’s failure to achieve ACR50 at 6 months.Results:The odds that a patient with a molecular signature of non-response failed to meet ACR50 criteria at 6 months was approximately three times greater than among those patients who lacked the signal (Table 1). No significant difference in odds ratios was observed between patients who were positive or negative for anti-CCP.Table 1.The odds of patients with a molecular signature of non-response failing to achieve an ACR50 response 6 months after TNF inhibitor therapy initiationOdds ratio (95% confidence interval)Anti-CCP positive3.5 (1.3-9.7)Anti-CCP negative3.1 (1.2-8.3)Conclusion:The MSRC test evaluates RA disease biology and accurately stratifies patients based on their likelihood of having an inadequate response to TNFi therapies, regardless of being negative or positive for anti-CCP autoantibodies. Rheumatologists can use the results of the MSRC test to inform targeted therapy selection for RA patients, instead of their anti-CCP serostatus, eliminating the variability inherent to the anti-CCP measurement and its inability to consistently predict TNFi therapy incompatibility. With the MSRC test, providers can rely on a more predictable and accurate assessment of TNFi therapy success or failure when coordinating patient management.References:[1]Mellors, T. et al. Clinical Validation of a Blood-Based Predictive Test for Stratification of Response to Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Therapies in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients. Network and Systems Medicine3, 91-104, doi:10.1089/nsm.2020.0007 (2020).[2]Braun-Moscovici, Y. et al. Anti-cyclic citrullinated protein antibodies as a predictor of response to anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol33, 497-500 (2006).[3]Szumilas, M. Explaining odds ratios. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry19, 227-229 (2010).[4]Sperandei, S. Understanding logistic regression analysis. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 24, 12-18, doi:10.11613/BM.2014.003 (2014).Disclosure of Interests:Stanley Cohen: None declared, Vibeke Strand Consultant of: Abbvie, Amgen, Arena, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion, Galapagos, Genentech/Roche, Gilead, GSK, Ichnos, Inmedix, Janssen,Kiniksa, Lilly,Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Samsung, Sandoz, Sanofi, Setpoint, UCB, Erin Connolly-Strong Shareholder of: Scipher Medicine Corporation, Employee of: Scipher Medicine Corporation, Johanna Withers Shareholder of: Scipher Medicine Corporation, Employee of: Scipher Medicine Corporation, Lixia Zhang Shareholder of: Scipher Medicine Corporation, Employee of: Scipher Medicine Corporation, Ted Mellors Shareholder of: Scipher Medicine Corporation, Employee of: Scipher Medicine Corporation, Viatcheslav Akmaev Shareholder of: Scipher Medicine Corporation, Employee of: Scipher Medicine Corporation


Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (14) ◽  
pp. 3540
Author(s):  
Hamid Maadi ◽  
Mohammad Hasan Soheilifar ◽  
Won-Shik Choi ◽  
Abdolvahab Moshtaghian ◽  
Zhixiang Wang

Trastuzumab as a first HER2-targeted therapy for the treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer patients was introduced in 1998. Although trastuzumab has opened a new avenue to treat patients with HER2-positive breast cancer and other types of cancer, some patients are not responsive or become resistant to this treatment. So far, several mechanisms have been suggested for the mode of action of trastuzumab; however, the findings regarding these mechanisms are controversial. In this review, we aimed to provide a detailed insight into the various mechanisms of action of trastuzumab.


2013 ◽  
Vol 71 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. 640.14-640
Author(s):  
P. Chalan ◽  
B.-J. Kroesen ◽  
K.S.M. van der Geest ◽  
M.G. Huitema ◽  
W.H. Abdulahad ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 70 (8) ◽  
pp. 1461-1464 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. U. Scherer ◽  
D. van der Woude ◽  
A. Willemze ◽  
L. A. Trouw ◽  
R. Knevel ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document