Added value of combining methotrexate with a biological agent compared to biological monotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

Polymeric nanoparticles-based targeted delivery of drugs and bioactive compounds for arthritis management

This review explores the potential of polymeric nanoparticles (PNPs) as targeted drug delivery systems for arthritic treatment, overcoming the limitations of the present therapy. A thorough literature search was conducted on the databases PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science to find published articles on the use of polymeric nanoparticles in the treatment of arthritis. This includes synthesis methods, mechanisms in drug delivery, and applications of PNPs. Polymeric nanoparticles showed excellent promise in the management of arthritis through enhanced stability of drugs, controlled and sustained drug release, and reduced systemic side effects. Some of the highlighted biocompatible and targeting capabilities of natural and synthetic polymers include chitosan, hyaluronic acid, and PLGA. Bioactive compounds such as curcumin and resveratrol delivered by PNPs enhanced therapeutic efficacy in preclinical arthritis models. Despite their promise, challenges such as rapid clearance and manufacturing scalability remain critical barriers. Polymeric nanoparticles offer a transformative approach to arthritis management by enabling targeted, sustained, and safe drug delivery. Translation into clinical applications would thus require developments in nanoparticle design, personalized medicine, and scalable production techniques.

Long-term safety and efficacy of anti-TNF multivalent VHH antibodies ozoralizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy profiles of ozoralizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the OHZORA, NATSUZORA and HOSHIZORA trials.

METHODS

This study conducted an integrated analysis of the three trials. Patients who completed the OHZORA trial with concomitant treatment of ozoralizumab and methotrexate (MTX) or the NATSUZORA trial without MTX were eligible to participate in the long-term extension HOSHIZORA trial. Safety assessment was performed in the safety analysis set, and the incidence rate per 100 person-year (PY) was calculated for a summary of adverse events (AEs) and AEs of special interests (AESIs). The efficacy was analysed in terms of disease activity index response rates and functional remission.

RESULTS

The OHZORA and NATSUZORA trials enrolled 521 patients, of whom 401 patients entered the HOSHIZORA trial and 279 completed the long-term extension treatment with a mean treatment duration of 200 weeks and total exposure of 1419.34 PY in all enrolled patients. Of the patients, 96.9% demonstrated ≥1 AEs, which is mostly mild to moderate. One death was observed, but no conspicuous AEs emerged and no specific concerns in AESIs were found through the long-term administration. The efficacy assessment revealed the maintained American College of Rheumatology response rates of 20%, 50%, and 70% during the trials.

CONCLUSION

This integrated analysis revealed no new safety concerns, and the efficacy was maintained in patients with RA under long-term ozoralizumab administration.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

jRCT2080223971, jRCT2080223973, NCT04077567.

Effect of a 2-week interruption in methotrexate treatment on COVID-19 vaccine response in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (VROOM study): a randomised, open label, superiority trial

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate is the first-line treatment for immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and reduces vaccine-induced immunity. We evaluated if a 2-week interruption of methotrexate treatment immediately after COVID-19 booster vaccination improved antibody response against the S1 receptor binding domain (S1-RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and live SARS-CoV-2 neutralisation compared with uninterrupted treatment in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases.

METHOD

We did a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised, superiority trial in secondary-care rheumatology and dermatology clinics in 26 hospitals in the UK. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases taking methotrexate (≤25 mg per week) for at least 3 months, who had received two primary vaccine doses from the UK COVID-19 vaccination programme were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a centralised validated computer program, to temporarily suspend methotrexate treatment for 2 weeks immediately after COVID-19 booster vaccination or continue treatment as usual. The primary outcome was S1-RBD antibody titres 4 weeks after COVID-19 booster vaccination and was assessed masked to group assignment. All randomly assigned patients were included in primary and safety analyses. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN11442263; following a pre-planned interim analysis, recruitment was stopped early.

FINDING

Between Sept 30, 2021, and March 7, 2022, we screened 685 individuals, of whom 383 were randomly assigned: to either suspend methotrexate (n=191; mean age 58·8 years [SD 12·5], 118 [62%] women and 73 [38%] men) or to continue methotrexate (n=192; mean age 59·3 years [11·9], 117 [61%] women and 75 [39%] men). At 4 weeks, the geometric mean S1-RBD antibody titre was 25 413 U/mL (95% CI 22 227-29 056) in the suspend methotrexate group and 12 326 U/mL (10 538-14 418) in the continue methotrexate group with a geometric mean ratio (GMR) of 2·08 (95% CI 1·59-2·70; p<0·0001). No intervention-related serious adverse events occurred.

INTERPRETATION

2-week interruption of methotrexate treatment in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases enhanced antibody responses after COVID-19 booster vaccination that were sustained at 12 weeks and 26 weeks. There was a temporary increase in inflammatory disease flares, mostly self-managed. The choice to suspend methotrexate should be individualised based on disease status and vulnerability to severe outcomes from COVID-19.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Therapeutic advances in rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is one of the most common immune mediated inflammatory diseases. People with rheumatoid arthritis present with pain, swelling, and stiffness that typically affects symmetrically distributed small and large joints. Without effective treatment, significant joint damage, disability, and work loss develop, owing to chronic inflammation of the joint lining (synovium). Over the past 25 years, the management of this condition has been revolutionized, resulting in substantially higher levels of disease remission and better long term outcomes. This improvement reflects a paradigm shift towards early and aggressive pharmacological intervention coupled with a proliferation in treatment choice, in turn related to enhanced pathobiological understanding and the advent of new drugs for rheumatoid arthritis. Following an overview of these developments from a historical perspective, and with a general audience in mind, this review focuses on newer, targeted treatments in an ever evolving landscape. The review highlights ongoing areas of debate and unmet need, including the proportion of patients with persistent, difficult-to-treat disease, despite recent advances. Also discussed are personalized, strategic approaches to individual patients, the role for imaging in clinical decision making, and the goal of sustained, drug free remission and disease prevention in the future.

Pharmacokinetics of oral and subcutaneous methotrexate in red and white blood cells in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: the methotrexate monitoring trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the pharmacokinetics of methotrexate polyglutamate (MTX-PG) accumulation in red blood cells (RBCs) and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after oral and subcutaneous MTX treatment.

METHODS

In a clinical prospective cohort study (Methotrexate Monitoring study), newly diagnosed patients with RA were randomised for oral or subcutaneous MTX. At 1, 2, 3 and 6 months after therapy initiation, blood was collected and RBCs and PBMCs were isolated. MTX-PG1-6 concentrations were determined by mass spectrometry methods using stable isotopes of MTX-PG1-6 as internal standards.

RESULTS

43 patients (mean age: 58.5 years, 77% female) were included. PBMCs and RBCs revealed disparate pharmacokinetic profiles in both absolute MTX-PG accumulation levels and distribution profiles. Intracellular MTX-PG accumulation in PBMCs was significantly (p<0.001) 10-fold to 20-fold higher than RBCs at all time points, regardless of the administration route. MTX-PG distribution in PBMCs was composed of mostly MTX-PG1 (PG1>PG2>PG3). Remarkably, the distribution profile in PBMCs remained constant over 6 months. RBCs accumulated mainly MTX-PG1 and lower levels of MTX-PG2-5 at t=1 month. After 3 months, MTX-PG3 was the main PG-moiety in RBCs, a profile retained after 6 months of MTX therapy. Subcutaneous MTX administration results in higher RBC drug levels than after oral administration, especially shortly after treatment initiation.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study reporting disparate MTX-PG accumulation profiles in RBCs versus PBMCs in newly diagnosed patients with RA during 6 months oral or subcutaneous MTX administration. This analysis can contribute to improved MTX therapeutic drug monitoring for patients with RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR 7149.

Comparison of Biological Agent Monotherapy and Associations Including Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs for Rheumatoid Arthritis: Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

OBJECTIVE

Update the available evidence comparing biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (CsDMARDs) to bDMARDs in monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

Research was limited to randomized controlled trials. Major outcome: ACR 20 response criteria at 24 weeks.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

clinical and radiographic criteria at week 24, 52 and 104.

RESULTS

23 trials (6358 patients), including seven bDMARDs and one other molecule: Anbainuo (anti-TNF-R). No study satisfied our search criteria for anakinra, certolizumab and infliximab. Compared to bDMARD monotherapy, combination therapy gives a better ACR 20 at 24 weeks (RR: 0.88 (0.84-0.94)) in fixed and random effect models, and this result is sustained at 52 and 104 weeks. The results were mostly similar for all other outcomes without increasing the risk of adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis confirms the superiority of combination therapy over monotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis, in accordance to the usual guidelines.

Effect of JAK inhibitors on high- and low-density lipoprotein in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are a new class of medication for treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and such inhibitors alter levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) in RA patients. However, the extent of such changes has not been systematically reviewed.

METHOD

A systematic review and network meta-analysis was performed on randomized trials in RA patients in response to JAKi identified from Pubmed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. The primary outcome was mean change of HDL-C and LDL-C from baseline. Mean treatment differences and the rank of the effect of various JAKi on HDL-C and LDL-C were estimated.

RESULTS

Based on data from 18 unique studies involving five approved JAK inhibitors and 6697 RA patients (JAKi = 3341, placebo = 3356), such inhibitors led to a mean increase of 8.11 mg/dl (95% CI 6.65-9.58, I² = 82%) in HDL levels from baseline, and a mean increase of 11.37 mg/dl (95% CI 7.84-14.91, I² = 88%) in LDL levels from baseline. Cardiovascular disease risk did not differ significantly between patients who received JAK inhibitors or those who received placebo or active agents.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis suggests that, at their recommended doses, all five JAK inhibitors lead to an increase in HDL and LDL levels in RA patients. Further long-term research is required to extend these results and understand whether changes in lipid levels in RA patients can affect cardiovascular risk. Key Points • This is the first systematic review and NMA examining the effect of all five clinically approved JAK inhibitors on lipid levels in RA patients. • Recommended doses of JAK inhibitors used for the treatment of RA patients can induce a significant increase in HDL and LDL levels. • Indirect pairwise comparisons suggest that only upadacitinib and peficitinib have significantly different ability to induce LDL change in RA patients.

Prescribing Trends of Biologic Disease-Modifying Anti-rheumatic Drugs Using a Claims Database from 6 Million People in Japan

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are used either when conventional synthetic DMARDs are ineffective or when disease activity is high and with poor prognostic factors, based on various clinical guidelines. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prescribing trends of bDMARDs for patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Japan, and to clarify whether the pharmacological therapy of bDMARDs is administered based on guidelines.

METHODS

We conducted a descriptive epidemiological study from 2012 to 2018 using the JMDC Claims Database, a nationwide claims database, and described the annual changes based on the number of patients prescribed bDMARDs. Anti-rheumatic drugs were identified based on the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical codes, including methotrexate, glucocorticoids, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and bDMARDs.

RESULTS

From the database including 6,862,244 people, the data of 6407 patients with rheumatoid arthritis were extracted. The present study demonstrated that the proportion of patients prescribed bDMARDs was 1.0 per 1000 people, with those aged ≥ 65 years being the most common age group. The proportion of patients with rheumatoid arthritis who were prescribed bDMARDs increased significantly over time (p < 0.0001). Additionally, the concomitant proportions of methotrexate (p < 0.0001), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (p < 0.0001) and glucocorticoids (p = 0.0001) prescribed with bDMARDs decreased significantly over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The increase in bDMARD monotherapy may be attributed to the new bDMARDs that have been launched sequentially; furthermore, physicians have come to recognise monotherapy as the mainstay of treatment. Future studies must accumulate evidence on the long-term efficacy and safety of bDMARDs.

JAK inhibition by methotrexate (and csDMARDs) may explain clinical efficacy as monotherapy and combination therapy

Methotrexate (MTX) is recognized as the anchor drug in the algorithm treating chronic arthritis (RA, psoriatic arthritis), as well as a steroid sparing agent in other inflammatory conditions (polymyalgia rheumatica, vasculitis, scleroderma). Its main mechanism of action has been related to the increase in extracellular adenosine, which leads to the effects of A2A receptor in M1 macrophages that dampens TNFα and IL12 production and increases IL1Ra and TNFRp75. By acting on A2B receptor on M2 macrophages it enhances IL10 synthesis and inhibits NF-kB signaling. MTX has also been shown to exert JAK inhibition of JAK2 and JAK1 when tested in Drosophila melanogaster as a model of kinase activity and in human cell lines (nodular sclerosis Hodgkin's lymphoma and acute myeloid leukemia cell lines). These effects may explain why MTX leads to clinical effects similar to anti-TNFα biologics in monotherapy, but is less effective when compared to anti-IL6R in monotherapy, which acting upstream exerts major effects downstream on the JAK1-STAT3 pathway. The MTX effects on JAK1/JAK2 inhibition also allows to understand why the combination of MTX with Leflunomide, or JAK1/JAK3 inhibitor leads to better clinical outcomes than monotherapy, while the combination with JAK1/JAK2 or JAK1 specific inhibitors does not seem to exert additive clinical benefit.