New onset or exacerbation of uveitis with infliximab: paradoxical effects?

New onset of uveitis during infliximab treatment: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Anti-tumor necrosis factor α (anti-TNF α) agents are an effective treatment for a variety of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. In ophthalmology anti-TNF α began to emerge as a possible therapy for non-infectious uveitis, paradoxically their administration may result in the onset or recurrence of inflammatory eye disease such as uveitis. We reported a case of new onset of bilateral anterior and intermediate uveitis in a patient with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) while being treated with infliximab and we performed a review of literature.

OBSERVATION

A 25-year-old female with RA under infliximab, presented with bilateral blurred vision. Anterior segment examination demonstrated retrodescmetic fine precipates, 1+ cells in the anterior chamber on both eyes. The fundus examination was difficult because of the vitritis. Fluorescein angiography demonstrated mild optic disc edema, and bilateral diffuse peripheral fern leaf cappilaritis. Optical coherence tomography showed severe cystoid macular edema bilaterally. The diagnosis of bilateral anterior and intermediate uveitis caused by infliximab was retained after exclusion of infectious and autoimmune aetiologies. She was treated with corticosteroid with good visual outcome.

CONCLUSION

In our case, new onset of uveitis may be considered as paradoxical effect of anti-TNF α therapy. Rheumatologists and ophthalmologists should be aware of this effect. Careful monitoring of patients under infliximab is necessary for appropriate diagnosis and early treatment.

Inflammatory cytokines as mediators of retinal endothelial barrier dysfunction in non-infectious uveitis

Characterised by intraocular inflammation, non-infectious uveitis includes a large group of autoimmune and autoinflammatory diseases that either involve the eye alone or have both ocular and systemic manifestations. When non-infectious uveitis involves the posterior segment of the eye, specifically the retina, there is substantial risk of vision loss, often linked to breakdown of the inner blood-retinal barrier. This barrier is formed by non-fenestrated retinal vascular endothelial cells, reinforced by supporting cells that include pericytes, Müller cells and astrocytes. Across the published literature, a group of inflammatory cytokines stand out as prominent mediators of intraocular inflammation, with effects on the retinal endothelium that may contribute to breakdown of the inner blood-retinal barrier, namely tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α, interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, IL-8, IL-17 and chemokine C-C motif ligand (CCL)2. This article reviews the function of each cytokine and discusses the evidence for their involvement in retinal endothelial barrier dysfunction in non-infectious uveitis, including basic laboratory investigations, studies of ocular fluids collected from patients with non-infectious uveitis, and results of clinical treatment trials. The review also outlines gaps in knowledge in this area. Understanding the disease processes at a molecular level can suggest treatment alternatives that are directed against appropriate biological targets to protect the posterior segment of eye and preserve vision in non-infectious uveitis.

Management of noninfectious scleritis

Scleritis is a manifestation of inflammatory eye disease that involves the sclera. It can be divided into multiple subtypes, including diffuse anterior, nodular anterior, necrotizing, and posterior scleritis. In many cases, scleritis is restricted to the eye; however, it can occur in the context of systemic illness, particularly autoimmune and infectious conditions. Patients with autoimmune conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, systemic lupus erythematosus, and polyangiitis with granulomatosis, may develop scleritis flares that may require topical and systemic therapy. Initial therapy typically involves oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); however, it is important to address the underlying condition, particularly if systemic. Other treatment regimens typically involve either local or systemic steroids or the use of immunomodulatory agents, which have a wide range of efficacy and documented use in the literature. There is a myriad of immunomodulatory agents used in the treatment of scleritis including antimetabolites, calcineurin inhibitors, biologics, and alkylating agents. In this review, we highlight the various subtypes of noninfectious scleritis and explore each of the mainstay agents used in the management of this entity. We explore the use of steroids and NSAIDs in detail and discuss evidence for various immunomodulatory agents.

Vasculitis induced by biological agents used in rheumatology practice: A systematic review

Objectives: Biological medications have been used with an increasing frequency to treat rheumatological diseases. Autoimmune events can be induced by these drugs, such as psoriasiform lesions, alopecia, lupus and, vasculitis, which more often affects the skin (small-sized vessels) and eventually other organs. In this review, we describe the clinical profile of patients with vasculitis induced by the main biological agents used in rheumatology.

Patients and methods: We performed a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. The PubMed database was used for searching eligible articles. We included case reports, case series, and letter to the editor of patients on anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (anti-TNF-a) molecules, as well as tocilizumab, ustekinumab, secukinumab, rituximab, and abatacept, who had vasculitis induced by these agents.

Results: Eighty-one articles were included for final analysis (n=89). Twenty-seven patients were using infliximab, 20 adalimumab, 18 etanercept, seven secukinumab, four certolizumab, four rituximab, three golimumab, three ustekinumab, two abatacept, and one tocilizumab. Unspecific leukocytoclastic vasculitis (LCV) was the most common type of vasculitis (n=37), followed by anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)- associated vasculitis (n=16). The medication was replaced with another biological molecule in 23 cases, with only four relapses. In six cases, the biological was maintained, but vasculitis worsened/persisted in one case, being necessary drug removal.

Conclusion: Infections, infusion reaction, cancer, and autoimmune events are well-known side effects of biological therapy. This review demonstrates that vasculitis is another adverse effect of this type of therapy, particularly the anti-TNF-a molecules, and LCV the most reported type of vasculitis.

Vasculitis associated with the use of an intrauterine device: A case report

Retinal vasculitis is a complication associated with a local condition or it can be a retinal expression of a systemic inflammatory disorder, which initially may go unnoticed. Drug-associated vasculitis is frequently difficult to identify, because many patients follow treatments with more than one drug and the route of administration varies. A 35-year-old female patient presented with sudden hearing loss, headache and blurred vision that had started two weeks earlier and had become progressively worse. Ophthalmological examination revealed anterior uveitis, bilateral optic disc swelling and retinal vasculitis. The orbito-cerebral MRI, the CT scan and the serological tests were within normal limits. Unable to identify the cause of the retinal vasculitis, the patient's medical history was reviewed. The patient had recently had a gynecological procedure, where a 13.5 mg levonorgestrel intrauterine contraceptive device was implanted. After the device was removed and methylprednisolone treatment started, the patient presented a visible remission of the symptoms and signs. To the best of our knowledge, there is no case of retinal disease and optic disc edema associated with auditory problems caused by an intrauterine device. A proper examination, correlated with a very thorough medical history, could identify rare diseases and associations, in order to provide adequate medical care.

Biologic Therapies and Small Molecules for the Management of Non-Infectious Scleritis: A Narrative Review

Scleritis refers to a wide spectrum of ocular conditions ranging from mild to sight-threatening scleral inflammation that may compromise visual function and threaten the anatomical integrity of the ocular globe. Most aggressive forms like necrotizing or posterior scleritis are often difficult-to-treat cases, refractory to conventional treatment. The association with systemic diseases, namely rheumatoid arthritis, Sjögren syndrome, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, and relapsing polychondritis, may have prognostic implications as well. A better understanding of the pathogenesis of ocular inflammatory diseases have paved the way to more effective and targeted treatment approaches. In this regard, a growing body of evidence supports the potential role of biologic agents in the management of non-infectious scleral inflammation, either idiopathic or in a background of immune-mediated systemic disorders. Biologic agents such as anti-tumor necrosis factor agents, interleukin-1 and interleukin-6 inhibitors as well as CD20 blockade have displayed promising results. More specifically, several studies have reported their ability to control scleral inflammation, reduce the overall scleritis relapses, and allow a glucocorticoid-sparing effect while being generally well tolerated. Anecdotal reports have also been described with other biologic agents including abatacept, ustekinumab, daclizumab, and alemtuzumab as well as targeted small molecules such as tofacitinib. Further studies are warranted to fully elucidate the role of biologic agents in non-infectious scleritis and investigate specific areas with the aim to administer treatments in the context of personalized medicine. This review summarizes the available data regarding clinical trials, small pilot studies, and real-life experience of the last two decades reporting the use of biologic agents in the management of non-infectious scleritis.

Acute orbital inflammation with loss of vision: a paradoxical adverse event associated with infliximab therapy for Crohn's disease

Anti-TNF-α agents (e.g. infliximab, adalimumab, etanercept) are effective management options in various inflammatory and autoimmune diseases (e.g. inflammatory bowel disease). The occurrence during anti-TNF-α agent therapy of a new onset or exacerbation of an inflammatory condition that usually responds to this class of drug has been termed a paradoxical adverse event (PAE). A wide range of ophthalmic PAEs have been reported including uveitis, optic neuritis/neuropathy, scleritis, orbital myositis, retinal vasculitis, and others. The patient reported herein developed a dramatic orbital inflammatory PAE during his infliximab infusions, which manifested as an acute orbital apex syndrome with vision loss. Physicians using this medication should be aware of this serious vision-threatening PAE, and urgent therapy with high dose intravenous corticosteroids may be required.

Characteristics Associated with the Occurrence and Development of Acute Anterior Uveitis, Inflammatory Bowel Disease, and Psoriasis in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis: Data from the Chinese Ankylosing Spondylitis Prospective Imaging Cohort

Introduction

This study aimed to determine the association between extra-articular manifestations (EAMs) and baseline characteristics of patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and identify their potential risk factors in an observational cohort.

Methods

We analyzed the data of consecutive patients with AS obtained between April 2016 and May 2019 from the ongoing Chinese Ankylosing Spondylitis Prospective Imaging Cohort.

Results

Among the 1414 patients with AS, 23.1% had experienced EAMs at baseline. The prevalence rates of acute anterior uveitis (AAU), inflammatory bowel disease, and psoriasis among patients with AS were 16.7, 6.9, and 2.6%, respectively, and the prevalence of AAU increased significantly with the disease duration. Patients with comorbidity of AAU and psoriasis had Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) than patients without EAMs (2.16 ± 0.984 vs. 1.99 ± 0.956 [p = 0.025] and 2.36 ± 1.01 vs. 1.99 ± 0.96 [p = 0.025]). Among the 1087 patients with AS without EAMs at baseline, 98 developed EAMs during follow-up. Long disease duration (> 10 years) and high disease activity at baseline (ASDAS > 2.1) were associated with the risk of new-onset EAMs (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval, CI], 2.150 [1.229–3.762] and 2.896 [1.509–5.561], respectively) and new-onset AAU (HR [95% CI], 2.197 [1.325–3.642] and 3.717 [1.611–8.574], respectively).

Conclusions

In Chinese patients with AS, patients with comorbidity of AAU and psoriasis had higher disease activity scores than patients without EAMs. Furthermore, the risk of AAU or combined EAMs increases with the duration of AS and appears to be associated with higher cumulative exposure to inflammation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40744-021-00293-0.

The clinical and pathogenic spectrum of surgically-induced scleral necrosis: A review

The onset of scleral necrosis after ocular surgery may have catastrophic ocular and systemic consequences. The two most frequent surgeries causing surgically-induced scleral necrosis (SISN) are pterygium excision and cataract extraction. Several pathogenic mechanisms are involved in surgically induced scleral necrosis. All of them are poorly understood. Ocular trauma increasing lytic action of collagenases with subsequent collagen degradation, vascular disruption leading to local ischemia, and immune complex deposition activating the complement system represents some of the events that lead to scleral necrosis. The complex cascade of events involving different pathogenic mechanisms and the patient's abnormal immune response frequently leads to delayed wound healing that predisposes the development of scleral necrosis. The management of SISN ranges from short-term systemic anti-inflammatory drugs to aggressive immunosuppressive therapy and surgical repair. Therefore, before performing any ocular surgery involving the sclera, a thorough ophthalmic and systemic evaluation must be done to identify high-risk patients that may develop SISN.

A review of ocular adverse events of biological anti-TNF drugs

The recent introduction of biological agents has revolutionized the treatment of chronic immune-inflammatory diseases; however, this new therapy did not come without significant side effects.Through large controlled studies indicating decrease in the number of uveitis flares, the role of TNF inhibitors therapy for non-infectious uveitis gained more ground. Paradoxically to its therapeutic effect, there are reports associating these drugs with the onset or recurrence of inflammatory eye disease.A number of studies have suggested possible roles for anti-TNF-α agents in precipitating or worsening an underlying inflammatory process, including the hypothesis of a disequilibrium in cytokine balance, but to date the mechanisms responsible for these adverse events are not fully understood.A PubMed literature search was performed using the following terms: ophthalmic complication, uveitis, inflammatory eye disease, optic neuritis, neuropathy, adverse events, anti-TNF, TNF alpha inhibitor, infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, golimumab, certolizumab, and biologics. The data presented in this study was mainly derived from the use of TNF inhibitors in rheumatology, essentially because these drugs have been used for a longer period in this medical field.Many of the ocular adverse events reported on this review may be considered a paradoxical effect of anti-TNF therapy. We found a variety of data associating new onset of uveitis with anti-TNF therapy for rheumatic conditions, predominantly under etanercept.In conclusion, although there is increasing data on ocular adverse events, it remains to be seen whether the suggested link between TNF inhibitors and the onset of ocular inflammation is substantiated by more quality data. Nevertheless, the awareness of potential treatment side effects with anti-TNF should be highlighted.