Tolérance systémique des corticoïdes en ophtalmologie : influence de la voie d’administration

BOB-ACG study: Pulse methylprednisolone to prevent bilateral ophthalmologic damage in giant cell arteritis. A multicentre retrospective study with propensity score analysis

INTRODUCTION

Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is complicated in 10 to 20% of cases by permanent visual ischemia (PVI). International guidelines advocate the use of intravenous pulse of methylprednisolone from 250 to 1000mg per day, for three days, followed by oral prednisone at 1mg/kg per day. The aim of this study is to assess whether this strategy significantly reduces the risk of early PVI of the second eye, compared with direct prednisone at 1mg/kg per day.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre retrospective observational study over the past 15 years in 13 French hospital centres. Inclusion criteria included: new case of GCA; strictly unilateral PVI, prednisone at dose greater than or equal to 0.9mg/kg per day; for the intravenous methylprednisolone (IV-MP) group, total dose between 900 and 5000mg, close follow-up and knowledge of visual status at 1 month of treatment, or earlier, in case of contralateral PVI. The groups were compared on demographic, clinical, biological, iconographic, and therapeutic parameters. Statistical analysis was optimised using propensity scores.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixteen patients were included, 86 in the IV-MP group and 30 in the direct prednisone group. One patient in the direct prednisone group and 13 in the IV-MP group bilateralised, without significant difference between the two strategies (3.3% vs 15.1%). Investigation of the association between IV-MP patients and contralateral PVI through classical logistic regression, matching or stratification on propensity score did not show a significant association. Weighting on propensity score shows a significant association between IV-MP patients and contralateral PVI (OR=12.9 [3.4; 94.3]; P<0.001). Improvement in visual acuity of the initially affected eye was not significantly associated with IV-MP (visual acuity difference 0.02 vs -0.28 LogMar), even in the case of early management, i.e., within the first 48hours after the onset of PVI (n=61; visual acuity difference -0.11 vs 0.25 LogMar). Complications attributable to corticosteroid therapy in the first month were significantly more frequent in the IV-MP group (31.8 vs 10.7%; P<0.05).

DISCUSSION

Our data do not support the routine use of pulse IV-MP for GCA complicated by unilateral PVI to avoid bilateral ophthalmologic damage. It might be safer to not give pulse IV-MP to selected patients with high risks of glucocorticoids pulse side effects. A prospective randomised multicentre study comparing pulse IV-MP and prednisone at 1mg/kg per day is desirable.

Subconjunctival injection of XG-102, a JNK inhibitor peptide, in patients with intraocular inflammation: a safety and tolerability study

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate the safety, tolerability, and systemic diffusion of a single escalating dose of XG-102 (a 31-D-amino-acid peptide inhibiting JNK pathway activation), administered subconjunctivally in the treatment of post-surgery or post-trauma intraocular inflammation.

METHODS

This is a dose-escalating, tolerance Phase Ib study. Twenty patients with post-surgery or post-traumatic intraocular inflammation were assigned to 1 of the 4 dose escalating (45, 90, 450, or 900 μg XG-102) groups of 5 patients each. Patients were evaluated at 24, 48 h, 8, and 28 days following the administration of XG-102, including laboratory tests, standard eye examinations, vital signs, and occurrence of adverse events. A single plasma quantification of XG-102 was performed 30 min after administration, according to previous pharmacokinetics studies performed on volunteers.

RESULTS

A total of 17 non-serious adverse events, considered unrelated to the study treatment, were reported for 10 patients. The adverse event incidence was not related to the drug dose. All patients experienced a decrease in intraocular inflammation as of 24 h post-administration and this decrease was sustained up to 28 days thereafter. No patient required local injection or systemic administration of corticoids following the administration of XG-102. XG-102 was undetectable in the first 3 dose groups. In the fourth-dose group (900 μg) the XG-102 plasma levels were above the limit of detection for 3 patients and above the limit of quantification for 1 patient.

CONCLUSIONS

In this first clinical trial using XG-102, administered as a single subconjunctival injection as adjunct therapy, in patients with recent post-surgery or post-trauma intraocular inflammation is safe and well tolerated. Further studies are required to evaluate its efficacy.

The efficacy of topical intralesional BCG-PSN injection in the treatment of erosive oral lichen planus: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Nowadays, it has been widely accepted that the local cell-mediated immunologic disorders may play an important role in the pathogenesis of oral lichen planus (OLP). Therefore, we sieved out polysaccharide nucleic acid fraction of bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG-PSN) from various immunomodulators to evaluate the short-term therapeutic efficacy and clinical safety of intralesional BCG-PSN injection for erosive OLP.

METHODS

A total of 56 OLP patients were randomly assigned to receive either intralesional injection of 0.5 ml BCG-PSN every other day (31 of 56) or 10 mg triamcinolone acetonide (TA, a positive-controlled group, 25 of 56) every week for 2 weeks. After the cessation of treatment, those cured from erosion were followed up for 3 months. Another two researchers measured erosive areas and recorded visual analog scale (VAS) scores both at the start and the end of the treatment. We also registered adverse reactions and the recurrence intervals.

RESULTS

After 2-week treatment, 27 of 31 BCG-PSN-treated patients (87.1%) and 22 of 25 TA-treated patients (88.0%) healed. There were no statistical differences between the two groups in erosive areas (27.86 +/- 27.97 vs. 25.68 +/- 34.65, P = 0.801) and VAS scores (2.45 +/- 1.64 vs. 2.40 +/- 1.38, P = 0.946). Three of 31 BCG-PSN-treated patients (9.7%) vs. 2 of 25 TA-treated patients (8.0%) experienced the swelling or burning sensation (P = 0.827). A total of 49 of 56 patients were followed up. There were no statistical differences in the recurrence rates (33.3% vs. 45.5%, P = 0.386) and intervals (80.89 +/- 26.83 vs. 73.48 +/- 28.11, P = 0.419).

CONCLUSIONS

Topical intralesional BCG-PSN injection is as effective as TA for erosive OLP, which suggests that topical intralesional BCG-PSN injection can be a promising therapeutic alternative for erosive OLP, especially for those insensitive, or even resistant, to glucocorticoids.