Cerebral lupus erythematosus responding to plasmaphaeresis

Application of Plasma Exchange in Steroid-Responsive Encephalopathy

Plasma exchange has been widely used in autoimmune neurological diseases and is the standard treatment for myasthenia gravis crisis and Guillain-Barre syndrome. A growing body of research suggests that, in the clinical application of steroid-responsive encephalopathy, such as for Hashimoto's encephalopathy, limbic encephalitis, systemic lupus erythematosus encephalopathy, ANCA-associated vasculitis encephalopathy, and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, plasma exchange is a safe, and effective option when steroids or other immunosuppressive therapies are ineffective in the short term or when contraindications are present. Additionally, plasma exchange can also be used alone or in combination with steroids, immunoglobulins, or other immunosuppressive agents to treat steroid-responsive encephalopathy. This paper reviews the clinical application of plasma exchange in steroid-responsive encephalopathy, including its indications, onset time, course, curative effects, and side effects.

Adjunctive plasma exchanges to treat neuropsychiatric lupus: a retrospective study on 10 patients

Neuropsychiatric manifestations of systemic lupus erythematosus (NPSLE) are among the main causes of morbidity and mortality attributed to lupus activity. Conventional NPSLE treatment combines CS and immunosuppressants, but some symptoms do not respond. We retrospectively evaluated the adjunction of plasma exchanges (PE) to treat 13 NPSLE flares occurring in 10 patients (mean age, 30 years) between 1989 and 2002. NP manifestations were the first SLE symptoms for seven patients, with a mean of 3.2 NP manifestations/flare. All patients received CS and cyclophosphamide pulses. A mean of 15 PE/flare were performed. All patients improved within a mean of 3 (median: 2.5; range: 1.5—8) weeks thereafter. Complete remissions of 7/13 flares were obtained within a mean of 7 (median: 4; range: 2—22) weeks. Partial remissions were achieved for the remaining six flares, characterized by new NP manifestations during three and insufficient control of the others. Other SLE manifestations regressed for all patients with the mean European consensus lupus activity measurement score declining from pretreatment 6.9 to 1.2. A regimen combining CS, cyclophosphamide and PE is effective against severe NPSLE, with acceptable toxicity. Lupus (2007) 16, 817—822.

Therapeutic apheresis in autoimmune diseases

Systemic autoimmune diseases based on an immune pathogenesis produce autoantibodies and circulating immune complexes, which cause inflammation in the tissues of various organs. In most cases, these diseases have a bad prognosis without treatment. Therapeutic apheresis in combination with immunosuppressive therapies has led to a steady increase in survival rates over the last 35 years. Here we provide an overview of the most important pathogenic aspects indicating that therapeutic apheresis can be a supportive therapy in some systemic autoimmune diseases, such as systemic lupus erythematosus, antiphospholipid syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, and inflammatory eye disease. With the introduction of novel and effective biologic agents, therapeutic apheresis is indicated only in severe cases, such as in rapid progression despite immunosuppressive therapy and/or biologic agents, and in patients with renal involvement, acute generalized vasculitis, thrombocytopenia, leucopenia, pulmonary, cardiac, or cerebral involvement. In mild forms of autoimmune disease, treatment with immunosuppressive therapies and/or biologic agents seems to be sufficient. The prognosis of autoimmune diseases with varying organ manifestations has improved considerably in recent years, due in part to very aggressive therapy schemes.

Plasma exchange for systemic lupus erythematosus

Efficacy of plasma exchange in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus has not been supported by the results of the first non-controlled and retrospective studies. Nonetheless, they remain relevant for some selected patients with life-threatening manifestations and/or severe therapy-resistant manifestations. They can be used as an adjuvant therapy in combination with corticosteroids and, when required, other immunosuppressant(s) for refractory renal disease, alveolar hemorrhage, some neuropsychiatric manifestations, thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome, hyperviscosity syndrome or symptomatic cryoglobulinemia. The use of newer technologies, like immunoadsorption, possibly in combination with recent biologics, might, in the future, offer some new perspectives for extracorporeal therapy of systemic lupus erythematosus.

Indications for plasma exchange in systemic lupus erythematosus in 2005

Plasma exchange can remove putative pathogenic autoantibodies and circulating immune complexes from the blood of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). However, their efficacy has only been supported by noncontrolled and/or retrospective studies. Nonetheless, PE may still be of relevance in some selected SLE patients and as adjunctive therapy, in combination with corticosteroids (CS) and other immunosuppressant(s). We review herein the principal historical steps of the use of plasma exchange to treat SLE, based upon the main trials and case reports that have highlighted its most pertinent indications. Acute life-threatening manifestations and severe therapy-resistant manifestations, like refractory SLE renal disease, diffuse alveolar hemorrhage, neuropsychiatric SLE, thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome, hyperviscosity syndrome and cryoglobulinemia, are the indications for which plasma exchange might have a beneficial therapeutic role. Although few SLE patients undergo plasma exchange each year nowadays (10-20 per year in France), adverse events are very rare and recent advances in plasma exchange technologies, like immunoadsorption, might, in the future, counterbalance their cost and broaden their place in the therapeutic armamentarium for SLE.

The role of plasmapheresis in the treatment of severe central nervous system neuropsychiatric systemic lupus erythematosus

Twenty-six patients, who received plasmapheresis (PP) either alone or synchronized with cyclophosphamide (IV-CYC/PP), are retrospectively reviewed from Medline searches and personal experience from 1976 to 2002. Patients with central nervous system neuropsychiatric systemic lupus erythematosus (CNS-NPSLE) were evaluated according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) case definitions of 1999. Eleven of the patients were under the age of 21 years (range 7-21 years), highlighting the need for an aggressive treatment option for young patients who are refractory to other treatments. After treatment with PP or IV-CYC/PP, 74% of patients improved, 13% stabilized, and 13% progressed. Major side-effects occurred from central line placement rather than immunomodulation from PP itself Step-down therapies are needed to supplement IV-CYC/PP once improvement has reached a plateau. Newer combinations of PP and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), human stem cell transplant (HSCT) and rituximab (RTX) should be considered in the future. In the absence of randomized controlled trials (RCT), experienced clinicians must weigh risk, benefit, and cost profiles in considering the treatment of severe CNS-NPSLE with PP.

New therapies: plasmapheresis, intravenous immunoglobulin, and monoclonal antibodies

Rheumatologic emergencies may pose a serious threat to life, and the treatment of patients with these illnesses continues to be challenging. In the last decade extensive animal and human research has led to development of new therapies. Considerable progress has been made in the therapy for RA. Newly developed biologic therapies have shown promising results in clinical studies, and two agents have already been approved by the FDA. These drugs are currently available for therapy and are under close postmarketing scrutiny to assess long-term efficacy and safety. Similar therapies are under investigation for SLE. Plasmapheresis, once used for many diseases, is now restricted mostly to conditions for which its use has been shown to be beneficial in randomized, controlled studies. Immunoadsorption is used to target specific disease-producing pathogens for removal during extracorporeal therapy. Evidence is accumulating for the use of IVIGs in several immune-mediated conditions. The outlook for some emergencies continues be grim, however, and various therapies are used based on evidence from anecdotal case reports and case series. The new therapies are relatively safe, but careful monitoring is needed, because there is potential for serious adverse events.

Apheresis for lupus erythematosus

Indications for the use of apheresis technologies in managing lupus erythematosus have undergone numerous conceptual changes since the procedure was automated in the 1960s and first attempted for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in 1974. Once thought to be a promising treatment for a variety of aspects of SLE, apheresis has been relegated to occupying a few important niches as an adjunct in managing the disorder. This article will review the history, physiology and rationale of apheresis pertaining to SLE. A focused critical review of pertinent literature is presented, along with specific recommendations relating to the place of apheresis in the lupus therapeutic spectrum.

Acute autonomic neuropathy in association with systemic lupus erythematosus

A patient is described with acute autonomic neuropathy, developing post partum in association with systemic lupus erythematosus, and showing a rapid clinical response to steroids. The pattern of tissue damage is suggestive of an immunologically mediated mechanism.

Aphresis

Therapeutic apheresis is a relatively new modality. Its absolute indications are few and include hyperviscosity syndrome, cryoglobulinemia, thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, Goodpasture's syndrome, and life-threatening complications of immunologic disorders refractory to conventional management. The use of apheresis in most of the other disorders discussed in this monograph is experimental and should not be employed unless all the mitigating therapeutic considerations clearly suggest an overwhelming advantage of apheresis. The promise of apheresis is much greater than its current use, and the research applications of specific component separation and antibody removal are of great importance. It is hoped that these new developments will shortly make current devices obsolete and improve the clinical management of patients as well as increase our knowledge of disease etiopathogenesis.