BACKGROUND:

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy is a rare acquired immune-mediated progressive or relapsing disorder causing peripheral neuropathic disease of duration more than two months. Many individuals with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy fail to make a long-term recovery with current treatment regimes. The aim of this study was to prospectively review the literature to determine the effectiveness of therapies for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy.

METHODS:

Articles published from January 1990 to December 2012 were searched for studies to treat adults with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy. Peer-reviewed full-text articles published in English were included.

RESULTS:

Nine placebo-controlled double-blinded randomised trials were reviewed to treat subjects with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy exhibiting various degrees of effectiveness. The most effect treatments were; three randomised controlled trials using intravenous immunoglobulin, a study comparing pulsed dexamethasone and short term prednisolone and rituximab all showed promising results and were well tolerated.

CONCLUSION:

IVIg and corticosteroids remain first line treatments for CIDP. Therapies using monoclonal antibodies, such as Rituximab and Natalizumab offer the most promise for treatment of Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy however they also need further research, as does the use of stem cell therapy for treating Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy. Large randomised controlled trials and better patient selection are required to address responsiveness of CIDP patients to conventional treatments to elucidate mechanisms of action and future directions for therapeutic improvement.

Background: Aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) represents ~60% of lymphomas in the West and even more in the developing world. cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (CHOP) is recognized as the standard chemotherapy regimen and the addition of rituximab to B-cell subtypes has been shown to significantly improve treatment outcomes. Nevertheless, still a significant fraction of patients is not offered rituximab due to economic reasons. Thus, CHOP is still offered to these patients as well as those with T-cell subtypes. Data from the early 1990s have indicated that the dose intensity (DI) of doxorubicin is a key factor in predicting survival. Methods: A Medline and Cochrane library search was carried out using the search terms 'CHOP', 'lymphoma' and 'randomized trials'. Eligible trials had CHOP as a control arm and any regimen administering doxorubicin at a higher DI (16.6 mg/m2/week) as the investigational arm. Pooling of data was carried out using the mixed effect model. Results: Eight trials were eligible. Patients receiving DI doxorubicin-based regimens had a significantly better overall survival [summary hazard ratio (SHR) 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.96], event-free survival (SHR 0.86; 95% CI 0.75-0.99) and higher complete response rate (summary odds ratio 0.91; 95% CI 0.67-0.97). Conclusion: High DI doxorubicin based should be considered in patients with aggressive NHL. © The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press.

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is a heterogeneous disease with recognised variability in molecular aetiology and clinical outcome. Though the use of agents such as rituximab significantly improves outcome, intrinsic genetic and morphological factors greatly affect the response to treatment. The objective of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of immunohistochemical subtyping and the International Prognostic Index (IPI) for predicting treatment outcome in Chinese DLBCL patients. We followed 108 cases of DLBCL and performed prognostic analyses based on molecular subtyping of the disease through immunostaining of tissue samples. The use of rituximab conferred a clinical benefit to DLBCL patients regardless of disease subtype. Importantly, this treatment regimen also improved outcomes in patients with the non-germinal centre B-cell-like (GCB) DLBCL subtype, frequently associated with poorer prognosis. Our results suggest that IPI was the best tool for the prediction of treatment outcome in our patient cohort, regardless of treatment regimen. Furthermore, the use of rituximab alongside classical chemotherapy regimens can improve the outcomes for DLBCL patients who exhibit both GCB and non-GCB subtypes of the disease.

Alternative tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) inhibitors and non-TNF biologics are available as treatment options for rheumatoid arthritis patients who exhibit inadequate response to TNF-α inhibitor (TNF-IR patients). These agents have considerable efficacy compared with placebo, but head-to-head comparisons among these agents have not been performed. The objective of this study was to use Bayesian approach to compare the effectiveness of cycling TNF-α inhibitors versus switching to non-TNF biologics in TNF-IR patients. A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE and Cochrane library. Key endpoints were the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) responses of 20/50/70 and the health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) score change at six months. Bayesian outcomes were calculated as the probability that OR is greater than one and HAQ score change difference is less than zero. Compared with TNF-α inhibitors, non-TNF biologics were associated with higher ACR response rates; in ACR20, the OR was 1.639 for abatacept [P(OR > 1) = 90.7 %], 1.871 for rituximab [P(OR > 1) = 96.2 %] and 3.52 for tocilizumab [P(OR > 1) = 99.9 %]. Similar trends were shown in the HAQ change comparison; the median differences (MD) were -0.259 for abatacept [P(MD < 0) = 100 %], -0.160 for rituximab [P(MD < 0) = 98.2 %], and -0.200 for tocilizumab [P(MD < 0) = 99.3 %]. In conclusion, switching to non-TNF biologics was more effective than cycling TNF-α inhibitor in TNF-IR patients.

BACKGROUND:

Knowledge of autoimmune hemolytic anemia is rapidly increasing, especially on pathogenesis, associated disorders and aspects of transfusion immunology. New treatment options have emerged.

MATERIAL AND METHOD:

This review is based on selected publications, a non-systematic search in PubMed and the authors' own research.

RESULTS:

Autoimmune hemolytic anemia is a heterogeneous group of diseases. The warm-antibody type is frequently associated with chronic lymphocytic leukemia or autoimmune systemic disease. Corticosteroids are still the first-line therapy and splenectomy is second-line, while rituximab has become an option in refractory disease. Blood transfusions require specific precautions such as restrictive use, extensive phenotyping of antigens and testing for alloantibodies and biological compatibility. Primary chronic cold agglutinin disease, a subgroup of cold-antibody autoimmune hemolytic anemia, is a clonal lymphoproliferative bone marrow disease. This subgroup is usually refractory to corticosteroids and patients with few clinical symptoms and slight anemia may not require drug therapy. However, in a majority, effective drugs are needed. The best documented therapy is infusions with rituximab, but new options are being tested. Immune hemolytic anemia associated with drugs occurs less frequently now than before.

INTERPRETATION:

Subgroups and associated or underlying disease should be identified in patients with autoimmune hemolytic anemia. The therapeutic implications of subclassification are important. Patients who have cold agglutinin disease and need therapy should be included in prospective trials.

Our aim was to compare all eight biologics available for rheumatoid arthritis in two patient populations, methotrexate-naive patients and inadequate responders to methotrexate, based on a comprehensive literature review. The five TNFα antagonists, rituximab, abatacept and tocilizumab used with methotrexate were compared to methotrexate monotherapy using the ACR50 response as the primary clinical endpoint and absence of radiographic progression after 1 year as the primary radiological endpoint. Odds ratios (ORs) were computed, as well as the number needed to treat (NNT) to obtain an ACR50 response for each biologic. We included 22 studies. Overall, combined biologic therapy was significantly more effective than methotrexate alone in both the naive group (OR: 2.11; 95% confidence interval [95%CI], 1.85-2.41) and the unresponsive group (OR: 4.82; 95%CI: 3.83, 6.08). Crude NNTs were as follows: etanercept, five in the naive group and three in the unresponsive group; adalimumab, seven and three; infliximab, seven and five; abatacept, seven and four; rituximab, five and five; and tocilizumab and certolizumab, four in the unresponsive group. None of the differences was statistically significant. In the naive group, combined biologic therapy was associated with a higher rate of absence of radiographic progression after 1 year compared to methotrexate alone (OR: 2.19; 95%CI: 1.55-3.08). All biologics had approximately the same efficacy. Methotrexate-naive patients treated with biologics had significantly less radiographic progression than those with cellular therapy. © 2012 Société française de rhumatologie.

Follicular lymphoma (FL) is characterized by an initial response to treatment with inevitable relapse. We evaluated chemoimmunotherapy resistance (CIR resistance) including transformation. We identified patients who received rituximab combination therapy for symptomatic FL. CIR resistance was defined as disease progression during rituximab-based chemoimmunotherapy, rituximab maintenance or within 6 months of treatment completion. Our primary outcome was time to early progression (CIR resistance). Between July 2006 and April 2010, 132 patients met the inclusion criteria and 22 (16.7%) demonstrated CIR resistance with a median follow-up of 33 months. High-risk Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) score was predictive of CIR resistance (hazard ratio [HR] 2.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-4.1; p = 0.001). Overall, eight patients (36.3%) transformed (biopsy-proven), with no transformation in the chemoimmunotherapy responder group. Median overall survival in the CIR resistant group was 47 months. Patients with CIR resistance had high rates of histologic transformation and shorter survival with poor response to next therapy.

OBJECTIVES:

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of biologic drugs compared with placebo for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) treatment.

METHODS:

A systematic review evaluating the efficacy and safety of biologic therapies compared with placebo in adult SLE patients treatment was performed. Data from studies performed before September 2013 were collected from several databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, SCIELO, Scopus, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts). Study eligibility criteria included randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials; regarding treatment with biologic agents in SLE adult patients; and published in English, German, Portuguese, and Spanish. Extracted data were statistically analyzed in a meta-analysis using the Review Manager (RevMan) 5.1 software. Efficacy outcomes included the SELENA-SLEDAI (Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment version of the SLE Disease Activity Index) score, the SRI (Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Responder Index), normalization of low C3 (<90 mg/dL), anti-double-stranded DNA positive to negative, and no new BILAG (British Isles Lupus Assessment Group index) 1A or 2B flares. Data on safety profile included adverse events, serious and severe adverse events, death, malignancy, infections, and infusion reactions. We also evaluated withdrawals from treatment due to lack of efficacy or adverse events.

RESULTS:

Thirteen randomized placebo-controlled trials met the criteria for data extraction for systematic review. A meta-analysis regarding the efficacy and safety of belimumab compared with placebo involving four of these trials was undertaken and the remainder contributed to a meta-analysis of the safety of biologic agents. In addition, two trials allowed the performance of a meta-analysis regarding the efficacy and safety of rituximab compared with placebo. Belimumab was more effective than placebo in most evaluated outcomes. No significant differences in the safety and tolerability data were observed between the belimumab and placebo groups. No differences were observed between the rituximab and placebo groups for the efficacy outcomes or safety parameters. Extracted data from the 13 studies were pooled, allowing assessment of the safety of biologic drugs. The meta-analysis revealed a satisfactory safety profile of these agents when used for SLE treatment, as there were no significant differences between the two evaluated groups (biologic agents and placebo) for all outcomes analyzed.

CONCLUSION:

Belimumab exhibited a satisfactory profile regarding efficacy, safety, and tolerability. Rituximab showed no superiority over placebo in terms of efficacy, despite its suitable safety profile. Biologic agents exhibited a good safety profile for SLE treatment, indicating that these agents are promising therapies and should be further investigated.

OBJECTIVE:

To study the effects in systemic lupus erythaematosus (SLE) of B cell directed therapy with rituximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody directed at CD20+ B cells, without concomitant immunosuppressive therapy in mild to moderate SLE.

METHODS:

Patients (n=24) with active SLE and failure of >or=1 immunosuppressive were recruited from three university centres into this phase I/II prospective open-label study. Patients were followed for 1 year to assess safety, efficacy and biological effects.

RESULTS:

In total, 18 of the patients scheduled to receive the full lymphoma dose of rituximab were evaluable for B cell levels in peripheral blood. Of these, 17 had effective CD19+ B cell depletion (<5 cells/microl). However, six of the depleted patients showed B cell return before 24 weeks. A total of 70% of patients improved by week 55, as defined by an SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) score improvement of >or=2 units from baseline. The degree of CD19+ B cell depletion was correlated with SLEDAI improvement at week 15 (r=0.84). In general, rituximab infusions were well tolerated. Approximately a third of the patients developed human anti-chimeric antibody (HACA) titres, which correlated with poor B cell depletion. Most patients (9 of 14) did not respond to immunisations with Pneumovax and tetanus toxoid.

CONCLUSIONS:

Rituximab is a promising new therapy for SLE. The variability of responses in patients with SLE may be related to HACA formation. The failure to respond to immunisations is surprising, in view of the apparently low risk of infections. Better biological markers are necessary to follow these patients during treatment.

The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of anti-CD20 treatment in Hispanic patients with refractory systemic lupus erythematosus and to determine whether baseline parameters predict disease flare. Fifty-two patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, 13 with active lupus nephritis, eight with thrombocytopenia, three with leukocytopenia, 25 with severe musculoskeletal involvement and three with skin involvement) refractory to conventional therapy were treated with anti-CD20 treatment (rituximab; MabThera, Roche) plus ongoing immunosuppressive treatment. Disease activity was assessed monthly using the SLEDAI validated for the Mexican population with a follow-up period of 6 months. At 6 months of follow-up, significant clinical improvements were detected, with a reduction in the global SLEDAI validated for the Mexican population score. Five of the 13 patients with lupus nephritis (38.4%) had a complete renal response and five (38.4%) had a partial response. Rituximab was also effective in patients with autoimmune thrombocytopenia, inducing a significant increase in platelet counts (p = 0.012). Nineteen of 25 patients with severe musculoskeletal involvement had remission of arthritis. Only one of the three patients with skin involvement had no lesions at 6 months. Rituximab treatment also allowed a reduction of the oral prednisone dose in the majority of patients. No baseline predictors of flare were found. Treatment was discontinued after the first infusion in two patients due to serum sickness and in another due to pulmonary infection. In conclusion, the addition of rituximab to conventional immunosuppressive therapy may be an effective strategy for lupus nephritis, autoimmune thrombocytopenia and inflammatory polyarthritis in patients with refractory systemic lupus erythematosus.