Clinical significance of immunogenicity in biologic therapy

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring for Current and Investigational Inflammatory Bowel Disease Treatments

This article reviews therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) use for current inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treatments. IBD comprises Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis-chronic gastrointestinal inflammatory disorders. Treatment options for moderate to severe IBD include thiopurines; methotrexate; biologic agents targeting tumor necrosis factor, α4β7 integrin or interleukins 12 and 23; and Janus kinase inhibitors. TDM is recommended to guide treatment decisions for some of these agents. Published literature concerning TDM for IBD treatments was reviewed. S.D.L., R.S., and E.V.L. drew on their clinical experiences. Polymorphisms resulting in altered enzymatic activity inactivating thiopurine metabolites can lead to myelotoxicity and hepatotoxicity. Increased elimination of biologic agents can result from immunogenicity or higher disease activity, leading to low drug concentration and consequent nonresponse or loss of response. TDM may aid treatment and dose decisions for individual patients, based on monitoring metabolite levels for thiopurines, or serum drug trough concentration and antidrug antibody levels for biologic agents. Challenges remain around TDM implementation in IBD, including the lack of uniform assay methods and guidance for interpreting results. The Janus kinase inhibitor tofacitinib is not impacted by enzyme polymorphisms or disease activity, and is not expected to stimulate the formation of neutralizing antidrug antibodies. TDM is associated with implementation challenges, despite the recommendation of its use for guiding many IBD treatments. Newer small molecules with less susceptibility to patient variability factors may fulfill the unmet need of treatment options that do not require TDM, although further study is required to confirm this.

The comparative immunogenicity of biologic therapy and its clinical relevance in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Biologic agents have demonstrated efficacy in treating patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Biologic agents also have an intrinsic capacity to induce an immune response in patients that could result in unwanted adverse events and/or treatment failure.

AREAS COVERED

In this systematic literature review, the authors document the incidence of immune responses, primarily anti-drug antibodies (ADA), to the biologic therapeutic agents currently in clinical practice for the treatment of PsA. The authors discuss the importance of these responses with respect to clinical practice.

EXPERT OPINION

Our evaluation of the published literature shows that the immune responses to the various biologic therapeutic agents currently being used to treat PsA are similar to those observed for these agents in other rheumatic diseases. Moreover, similar to observations in other rheumatic diseases, the incidence of ADA formation to biologic agents in patients with PsA is often decreased when patients are given concomitant treatment with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. These data strongly suggest that the immune response is a characteristic of the biologic agent. Using therapeutic drug monitoring may be an approach to assess the immune response to the agent and to mitigate the potential impact on efficacy and safety, and consequently optimize treatment.

Immunogenicity of biologics in inflammatory bowel disease

Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis are chronic inflammatory disorders of the gastrointestinal tract. Treatment options include biologic therapies; however, a proportion of patients lose response to biologics, partly due to the formation of anti-drug antibodies (ADAbs). Concomitant immunosuppressive agents reduce the development of ADAbs. This review article aims to assess the immunogenicity of biologic therapies and their clinical implications. A comprehensive literature search was conducted for articles published January 2009 to August 2015 reporting immunogenicity to adalimumab (ADM), certolizumab pegol (CZP), golimumab, infliximab (IFX), ustekinumab, and vedolizumab in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Eligible articles were reviewed and quality assessed by independent reviewers. Overall, 122 publications reporting 114 studies were assessed. ADAbs were reported for all agents, but the percentage of patients developing ADAbs was extremely variable, with the highest (65.3%) being for IFX administration to patients with IBD. ADAb presence was frequently associated with a reduction in primary efficacy and a loss of response, and, for IFX, an increase in adverse events (AEs). Lower serum levels of ADM, CZP and IFX were seen in ADAbs-positive rather than ADAbs-negative patients; pharmacokinetic data were unavailable for other therapies. Little information was available regarding the timing of ADAb development; studies reported their detection from as early as 10-14 days up to months after treatment initiation. Biologic therapies carry an intrinsic risk of immunogenicity, although reported rates of ADAbs vary considerably. The clinical implications of immunogenicity are a concern for effective treatment; further research, particularly into the more recently approved biologics, is required.

Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in psoriatic patients previously treated with etanercept in a real-world setting

INTRODUCTION

Knowledge on the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in psoriasis patients switching from etanercept is scarce, especially on the influence that causes of etanercept discontinuation may have on adalimumab response.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the response, adverse effects and factors that may influence the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in psoriasis patients who failed on etanercept therapy in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Data from all moderate to severe plaque psoriasis patients who switched from etanercept to adalimumab were extracted from a registry of biological therapies of our department. Primary endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving PASI 50 at weeks 12, 24, and 52. Secondary endpoints were the percentages of patients achieving PASI 75 and PASI 90, patients who maintained PASI values <5 and <3, and the safety of adalimumab.

RESULTS

Of 35 patients who fulfilled the study criteria, 82.9% achieved PASI 50 at week 12, 74.3% at week 24, and 74.3% at week 52 on adalimumab treatment. Eleven of 16 primary and 11 of 17 secondary nonresponders to etanercept responded to adalimumab. There were no treatment discontinuations due to side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Previous etanercept failure seems not influence the success and safety of adalimumab treatment in moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.