Analytical and Clinical Validation of a Target-Enhanced Whole Genome Sequencing-Based Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Test.

Evaluation of the test performance of the Target enhanced whole-genome sequencing (TE-WGS) assay for comprehensive oncology genomic profiling. The analytical validation of the assay included sensitivity and specificity for single nucleotide variants (SNVs), insertions/deletions (indels), and structural variants (SVs), revealing a revealed a sensitivity of 99.8% for SNVs and 99.2% for indels. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 99.3% SNVs and 98.7% indels. Clinical validation was benchmarked against established orthogonal methods and demonstrated high concordance with reference methods. TE-WGS provides insights beyond targeted panels by comprehensive analysis of key biomarkers and the entire genome encompassing both germline and somatic findings.

Clinical Utility of Whole-Genome Analysis as One-for-All Test for Breast Cancer: A Case Series.

Introduction: Breast cancer exhibits vast genomic diversity, leading to varied clinical manifestations. Integrating molecular subtyping with in-depth genomic profiling is pivotal for informed treatment choices and prognostic insights. Whole-genome clinical analysis provides a holistic view of genome-wide variations, capturing structural changes and affirming tumor suppressor gene loss of heterozygosity. Case Presentation: Here we detail four unique breast cancer cases from Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, highlighting the actionable benefits and clinical value of whole-genome sequencing (WGS). As an all-in-one test, WGS demonstrates significant clinical utility in these cases, including: (1) detecting homologous recombination deficiency with underlying somatic causal variants (case 1), (2) distinguishing double primary cancer from metastasis (case 2), (3) uncovering microsatellite instability (case 3), and (4) identifying rare germline pathogenic variants in TP53 gene (case 4). Our observations underscore the enhanced clinical relevance of WGS-based testing beyond pinpointing a few driver mutations in conventional targeted panel sequencing platforms. Conclusion: With genomic advancements and decreasing sequencing costs, WGS stands out as a transformative tool in oncology, paving the way for personalized treatment plans rooted in individual genetic blueprints.

Improvement in clinical disease activity index when treatment selection is informed by the tumor necrosis factor-ɑ inhibitor molecular signature response classifier: analysis from the study to accelerate information of molecular signatures in rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: A blood-based molecular signature response classifier (MSRC) predicts non-response to tumor necrosis factor-ɑ inhibitors (TNFi) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This is an interim analysis of data collected in the Study to Accelerate Information of Molecular Signatures (AIMS) in RA from patients who received the MSRC test between September 2020 and November 2021. Absolute changes in clinical disease activity index (CDAI) scores from baseline were evaluated at 12 weeks (n = 470) and 24 weeks (n = 274). RESULTS: Predicted TNFi non-responders who received a biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (b/tsDMARD) with an alternative mechanism of action (altMOA) experienced up to 1.8-fold greater improvements in CDAI scores than those treated with a TNFi (12 weeks: 12.2 vs 8.0; p-value = 0.083; 24 weeks: 14.2 vs 7.8 p-value = 0.009). In patients with a molecular signature of non-response to TNFi in high disease activity at baseline, this corresponded to 43.2% relative improvement in achieving a lower CDAI disease activity level when likely TNFi non-responders were treated with a non-TNFi therapy (38.9% vs 55.7%). Commensurate improvements in efficiency of spend are expected when TNFi are avoided in favor of altMOA. CONCLUSIONS: RA treatment selection informed by MSRC test results improves clinical outcomes in real-world care and offers improvements in efficiency of healthcare spending.

Clinical utility of therapy selection informed by predicted nonresponse to tumor necrosis factor-ɑ inhibitors: an analysis from the Study to Accelerate Information of Molecular Signatures (AIMS) in rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: The molecular signature response classifier (MSRC) is a blood-based precision medicine test that predicts nonresponders to tumor necrosis factor-ɑ inhibitors (TNFi) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) so that patients with a molecular signature of non-response to TNFi can be directed to a treatment with an alternative mechanism of action. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This study evaluated decision choice and treatment outcomes resulting from MSRC-informed treatment selection within a real-world cohort. RESULTS: Therapy selection by providers was informed by MSRC results for 73.5% (277/377) of patients. When MSRC results were not incorporated into decision-making, 62.0% (62/100) of providers reported deviating from test recommendations due to insurance-related restrictions. The 24-week ACR50 responses in patients prescribed a therapy in alignment with MSRC results were 39.6%. Patients with a molecular signature of non-response had significantly improved responses to non-TNFi therapies compared with TNFi therapies (ACR50 34.8% vs 10.3%, p-value = 0.05). This indicates that predicted non-responders to TNFi therapies are not nonresponders to other classes of RA targeted therapy. Significant changes were also observed for CDAI, ACR20, ACR70, and for responses at 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of the MSRC into patient care could fundamentally shift treatment paradigms in RA, resulting in substantial improvements in real-world treatment outcomes.

Guided therapy selection in rheumatoid arthritis using a molecular signature response classifier: an assessment of budget impact and clinical utility.

BACKGROUND: Patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be treated with a range of targeted therapies following inadequate response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs such as methotrexate. Whereas clinical practice guidelines provide no formal recommendations for initial targeted therapies, the tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitor (TNFi) class is the prevalent first-line selection based on clinician experience, its safety profile, and/or formulary requirements, while also being the costliest. Most patients do not achieve adequate clinical response with a first-line TNFi, however. A molecular signature response classifier (MSRC) test that assesses RA-related biomarkers can identify patients who are unlikely to achieve adequate response to TNFi-class therapies. OBJECTIVE: To model cost-effectiveness of MSRC-guided, first-line targeted therapy selection compared with current standard care. METHODS: This budget impact analysis used data sourced from August to September 2020. The prevalence of each first-line targeted therapy was obtained using market intelligence from Datamonitor/Informa PLC Rheumatology Dashboard Forecast 2020, and the average first-year cost of treatment for each class was calculated using wholesale acquisition costs from IBM Micromedex RED BOOK Online. Average effectiveness for each class was based on manufacturer-reported ACR50 response rates (American College of Rheumatology adequate response criteria of 50% improvement at 6 months after therapy initiation). The impact of MSRC testing on first therapy selection was predicted based on a third party-generated decision-impact study that analyzed potential alterations in rheumatologist prescribing patterns after receiving MSRC test reports. Sensitivity analysis evaluated potential impacts of variation in first-year medication cost, adherence to MSRC report, and test price on the first-year cost of treatment. Cost for response (first-year therapy cost therapy divided by probability of achieving ACR50) was compared between standard care and MSRC-guided care. RESULTS: The estimated cost for first-year, standard-care treatment was $65,117, with 80% of patients initiating treatment with a TNFi. Cost for achieving ACR50 response was $177,046. After applying MSRC-guided patient stratification and therapy selection, the first-year cost was $56,543, net of test price, with 49.0% of patients initiating with a TNFi. First-year MSRC-guided care cost, including test price, was estimated at $117,103, a 33.9% improvement over standard care. Sensitivity analysis showed a net cost improvement for guided care vs standard care across all scenarios. Patients predicted to be inadequate TNFi responders, when modeled with lower-priced alternatives, were predicted to show increased ACR50 response rates. Those with MSRC test results indicating a first-line TNFi were predicted to show an ACR50 response rate superior to that for any other class. In this model, if implemented clinically, MSRC-guided care might save the US health care system more than $850 million annually and improve ACR50 by up to 31.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Precision medicine using MSRC-guided patient stratification and therapy selection may both decrease cost and improve efficacy of targeted RA therapies. DISCLOSURES: This work was funded in full by Scipher Medicine Corporation, which participated in data analysis and interpretation and drafting, reviewing, and approving the publication. All authors contributed to data analysis and interpretation and publication preparation, maintaining control over the final content. Arnell, Withers, and Connolly-Strong are employees of and have stock ownership in Scipher Medicine Corporation. Bergman has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Scipher Medicine and owns stock or stock options in Johnson & Johnson. Kenney, Logan, and Lim-Harashima are consultants for Scipher Medicine Corporation. Basu has nothing to disclose.

A Molecular Signature Response Classifier to Predict Inadequate Response to Tumor Necrosis Factor-α Inhibitors: The NETWORK-004 Prospective Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: Timely matching of patients to beneficial targeted therapy is an unmet need in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). A molecular signature response classifier (MSRC) that predicts which patients with RA are unlikely to respond to tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitor (TNFi) therapy would have wide clinical utility. METHODS: The protein-protein interaction map specific to the rheumatoid arthritis pathophysiology and gene expression data in blood patient samples was used to discover a molecular signature of non-response to TNFi therapy. Inadequate response predictions were validated in blood samples from the CERTAIN cohort and a multicenter blinded prospective observational clinical study (NETWORK-004) among 391 targeted therapy-naïve and 113 TNFi-exposed patient samples. The primary endpoint evaluated the ability of the MSRC to identify patients who inadequately responded to TNFi therapy at 6 months according to ACR50. Additional endpoints evaluated the prediction of inadequate response at 3 and 6 months by ACR70, DAS28-CRP, and CDAI. RESULTS: The 23-feature molecular signature considers pathways upstream and downstream of TNFα involvement in RA pathophysiology. Predictive performance was consistent between the CERTAIN cohort and NETWORK-004 study. The NETWORK-004 study met primary and secondary endpoints. A molecular signature of non-response was detected in 45% of targeted therapy-naïve patients. The MSRC had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.64 and patients were unlikely to adequately respond to TNFi therapy according to ACR50 at 6 months with an odds ratio of 4.1 (95% confidence interval 2.0-8.3, p value 0.0001). Odds ratios (3.4-8.8) were significant (p value < 0.01) for additional endpoints at 3 and 6 months, with AUC values up to 0.74. Among TNFi-exposed patients, the MSRC had an AUC of up to 0.83 and was associated with significant odds ratios of 3.3-26.6 by ACR, DAS28-CRP, and CDAI metrics. CONCLUSION: The MSRC stratifies patients according to likelihood of inadequate response to TNFi therapy and provides patient-specific data to guide therapy choice in RA for targeted therapy-naïve and TNFi-exposed patients.

A blood-based molecular signature response classifier (MSRC) integrating next-generation RNA sequencing data with clinical features predicts the likelihood that a patient with rheumatoid arthritis will have an inadequate response to TNFi therapy. Treatment selection guided by test results, with likely inadequate responders appropriately redirected to a different therapy, could improve response rates to TNFi therapies, generate healthcare cost savings, and increase rheumatologists' confidence in prescribing decisions and altered treatment choices. The MSRC described in this study predicts the likelihood of inadequate response to TNFi therapies among targeted therapy-naïve and TNFi-exposed patients in a multicenter, 24-week blinded prospective clinical study: NETWORK-004. Patients with a molecular signature of non-response are less likely to have an adequate response to TNFi therapies than those patients lacking the signature according to ACR50, ACR70, CDAI, and DAS28-CRP with significant odds ratios of 3.4­8.8 for targeted therapy-naïve patients and 3.3­26.6 for TNFi-exposed patients. This MSRC provides a solution to the long-standing need for precision medicine tools to predict drug response in rheumatoid arthritis­a heterogeneous and progressive disease with an abundance of therapeutic options. These data validate the performance of the MSRC in a blinded prospective clinical study of targeted therapy-naïve and TNFi therapy-exposed patients.

The ALPHA Project: Establishing consensus and prioritisation of global community recommendations to address major challenges in lupus diagnosis, care, treatment and research.

The Addressing Lupus Pillars for Health Advancement (ALPHA) Project is a global consensus effort to identify, prioritise and address top barriers in lupus impacting diagnosis, care, treatment and research. To conduct this process, the ALPHA Project convened a multistakeholder Global Advisory Committee (GAC) of lupus experts and collected input from global audiences, including patients. In phase I, the ALPHA Project used expert interviews and a global survey of lupus experts to identify and categorise barriers into three overarching pillars: drug development, clinical care and access to care. In phase II, reported here, the GAC developed recommended actionable solutions to address these previously identified barriers through an in-person stakeholder meeting, followed by a two-round scoring process. Recommendations were assessed for feasibility, impact and timeline for implementation (FIT), where potential FIT component values were between 1 and 3 and total scores were between 3 and 9. Higher scores represented higher achievability based on the composite of the three criteria. Simplifying and standardising outcomes measures, including steroid sparing as an outcome (drug development) and defining the lupus spectrum (clinical care) ranked as the highest two priority solutions during the GAC meeting and received high FIT scores (7.67 and 7.44, respectively). Leveraging social media (access to care) received the highest FIT score across all pillars (7.86). Cross-cutting themes of many solutions include leveraging digital technology and applying specific considerations for special populations, including paediatrics. Implementing the recommendations to address key barriers to drug development, clinical care and access to care is essential to improving the quality of life of adults and children with lupus. Multistakeholder collaboration and guidance across existing efforts globally is warranted.

Patient-reported flare frequency is associated with diminished quality of life and family role functioning in systemic lupus erythematosus.

PURPOSE: To understand the influence of the systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)-related flares on patient's health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: An online survey included individuals with self-reported physician's diagnosis of SLE or lupus nephritis (LN). Lupus impact tracker (LIT) assessed lupus symptoms and HRQoL, SLE-Family questionnaire measured family role functioning, and Healthy Days Core Module (HDCM) measured overall mental and physical health. Chi-square and analysis of variance evaluated differences by flare frequency. Multivariable linear regression and generalized linear models evaluated the independent relationships of flare frequency to HRQoL. RESULTS: 1066 respondents with SLE or LN completed the survey. Mean (SD) duration of illness was 12.4 (10.1) years. 93.4% (n = 996) were women, 82.3% (n = 830) were White, and 49.7% (n = 530) were employed or students. More frequent flares were associated with significantly worse scores on all HRQoL measures: LIT (adjusted means: 0 flares, 31.8; 1-3 flares, 47.0; 4-6 flares, 56.1; ≥ 7 flares, 63.6; P < 0.001); SLE-Family (adjusted means: 0 flares, 3.1; 1-3 flares 3.8; 4-6 flares, 4.3; ≥ 7 flares, 4.6, P < 0.001); HDCM unhealthy days (0 flares, 8.7; 1-3 flares, 17.4; 4-6 flares, 21.5; ≥ 7 flares, 26.2 days, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Lupus flares contributed to impaired functional and psychological well-being, family functioning, and number of monthly healthy days. Better understanding of the burden of flare activity from the patient's perspective will support a holistic approach to lupus management.

Treatment Patterns and Health Care Costs of Lupus Nephritis in a United States Payer Population.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics, treatment patterns, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and cost of care for members of a large United States (US) health insurance plan with lupus nephritis (LN). METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted using a health insurance plan database to identify adult members with a diagnosis of LN. Medical and pharmacy claims were used to describe demographics, comorbidities, HCRU, and cost patterns over a 12-month follow-up period for each patient, between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2016. All study variables were examined descriptively. RESULTS: A total of 1039 patients were available for analysis (median age, 47 years; 83% female). The median Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was 3.3. Less than half (41%) of patients received immunosuppressive therapies commonly used to treat LN. Evidence indicated that 58% of the study population were prescribed corticosteroid therapy, in most cases (73%) for more than 60 days. Adverse events known to be associated with corticosteroid therapy were recorded in 58% of patients. Guideline-recommended preventive therapy with hydroxychloroquine was prescribed for 54% of members with LN. Nearly half (47%) of members with LN did not see a nephrologist and more than one-third (36%) did not see a rheumatologist over 1 year of follow-up. Rates of all-cause hospitalization and emergency department (ED) use were 25% and 35%, respectively. The mean all-cause per-member-per-month (PMPM) medical cost for the study population was $2801, with LN-specific costs accounting for $1147 PMPM. CONCLUSION: Patients with LN who are insured through a large US health plan appeared to underutilize outpatient specialist services and guideline-recommended hydroxychloroquine therapy. Corticosteroid use and adverse events known to be associated with corticosteroids were common in this cohort.

Acthar Gel (repository corticotropin injection) for persistently active SLE: study design and baseline characteristics from a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Objective: SLE is a chronic inflammatory autoimmune disease characterised by the excessive production of autoantibodies, immune complexes and proinflammatory cytokines. Repository corticotropin injection (RCI) is a naturally sourced complex mixture of adrenocorticotropic hormone analogues and other pituitary peptides. RCI is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use during an exacerbation or as maintenance therapy in select cases of SLE. This paper discusses the design and baseline characteristics of a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, 24-week clinical trial evaluating the effect of RCI in reducing disease activity for patients with persistently active SLE despite moderate-dose corticosteroid use. Methods: Efficacy will be evaluated using the SLE Responder Index-4 (SRI-4), SLE Disease Activity Index-2000 (SLEDAI-2K), British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-2004 (BILAG-2004) and Physician's Global Assessment (PGA). The primary efficacy endpoint will be the proportion of SRI-4 responders at week 16. Secondary and exploratory endpoints will include changes in disease activity scores over time, prednisone dose and biomarkers of inflammation and bone turnover. The safety and tolerability profile of RCI will also be evaluated through adverse event profiles, physical examination, clinical laboratory tests and serum cortisol levels. Results: Target enrolment for this global study is 270 patients, and as of 15 November 2019, the modified intent-to-treat population included 169 patients. The study cohort had 91.7% women, had a mean age of 39.7 years, mean SLEDAI-2K total score of 9.9, mean BILAG-2004 total score of 18.1, mean PGA of 59.7 and mean prednisone or equivalent daily dose of 11.1 mg. A total of 79.3% and 64.5% of patients were receiving concomitant antimalarial or immunosuppressive therapy, respectively. Conclusions: Data from this study will provide valuable insights into the therapeutic role of RCI in refractory SLE, as well as important information regarding its safety profile.

Repository Corticotropin Injection for Active Rheumatoid Arthritis Despite Aggressive Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Withdrawal Trial.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to assess efficacy and safety of repository corticotropin injection (RCI) in subjects with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite treatment with a corticosteroid and one or two disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). METHODS: All subjects received open-label RCI (80 U) twice weekly for 12 weeks (part 1); only those with low disease activity [LDA; i.e., Disease Activity Score 28 joint count and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) < 3.2] were randomly assigned to receive either RCI (80 U) or placebo twice weekly during the 12-week double-blind period (part 2). The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of subjects who achieved LDA at week 12. Secondary efficacy endpoints included proportions of subjects who maintained LDA during weeks 12 through 24 and achieved Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) ≤ 10 at weeks 12 and 24. Safety was assessed via adverse event reports. RESULTS: Of the 259 enrolled subjects, 235 completed part 1; 154 subjects (n = 77 each for RCI and placebo) entered part 2, and 127 (RCI, n = 71; placebo, n = 56) completed. At week 12, 163 subjects (62.9%) achieved LDA and 169 (65.3%) achieved CDAI ≤ 10 (both p < 0.0001). At week 24, 47 (61.0%) RCI-treated and 32 (42.1%) placebo-treated subjects maintained LDA (p = 0.019); 66 (85.7%) RCI-treated and 50 (65.8%) placebo-treated subjects maintained CDAI ≤ 10 (p = 0.004). No unexpected safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: RCI was effective and generally safe in patients with active RA despite corticosteroid/DMARD therapy. By week 12, > 60% of patients achieved LDA, which was maintained with 12 additional weeks of treatment. Most patients who achieved LDA maintained it for 3 months after RCI discontinuation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02919761.

Patient-Reported Lupus Flare Symptoms Are Associated with Worsened Patient Outcomes and Increased Economic Burden.

BACKGROUND: Lupus flares significantly contribute to health resource utilization and hospitalizations. Identification of flare activity may be hindered since validated assessment scales are rarely used in clinical practice and flare severity may fall below clinician-assessed thresholds. Therefore, patient-reported outcomes of lupus flare frequency are important assessment tools for lupus management. OBJECTIVE: To better understand the relationship between lupus flares as reported by persons with lupus and specific direct and indirect costs, including hospital admission, unplanned urgent care (UC)/emergency department (ED) visits, work productivity loss, and nonwork activity impairment. METHODS: In this cross-sectional analysis, persons with lupus were drawn from 2 enriched sampling sources. Data were collected via an online survey and included individuals with self-reported physician's diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus, skin or discoid lupus, or lupus nephritis. Respondents were asked the total number of hospitalizations and ED/UC visits for any reason and for lupus-related hospitalizations and ED/UC visits. Work productivity loss and nonwork activity impairment were measured via the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment - General Health scale. The sample was stratified into those with 0 flares, 1-3 flares, 4-6 flares, and 7 or more flares, with 0 flares used as the reference. Chi-square tests for trend and analyses of variance were used to evaluate differences among flare frequency groups. Multivariable regression modeling was conducted to evaluate the independent relationship of flare frequency to health care use and productivity loss. RESULTS: We studied 1,288 survey respondents with known flare frequency in the past 12 months. Flare frequency increased with duration of illness. The mean number of lupus-related hospital admissions was significantly associated with increasing flare frequency for the total sample (F = 3.9; P < 0.009). Compared to patients with no flare, those who reported flare activities had 1.72-3.13 times higher rates of hospitalizations. The mean number of lupus-related ED/UC visits were also found to be significantly associated with increasing flare frequency for the total sample (F = 23.4; P < 0.001), and rates were increased by 6.98- to 16.12-fold for unplanned ED/UC visits depending on flare frequency. Rates of employment were significantly related to increasing flare frequency. With respect to work-related impairment, absenteeism increased with greater lupus flare frequency (F = 6.2; P < 0.001), as did presenteeism (F = 31.5; P < 0.001) and the combined value of total work productivity loss (F = 30.4; P < 0.001). Mean work-related activity impairment was 12%-32% more among patients who reported flare activities compared to those who reported no flares. CONCLUSIONS: Increased lupus-related flare frequency is associated with worsened patient outcomes as measured by increased hospitalizations, visits to the ED/UC, work productivity loss, and activity impairment. This association may be an important indicator of disease severity and resource burden and therefore suggests an unmet need among patients experiencing lupus-related flares. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals via grants to Vedanta Research and The Lupus Foundation of America. Katz received consulting fees from Vedanta Research, which received grant support from Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals to support data collection and analysis. Nelson and Connolly-Strong are employees of Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals and are stockholders in the company. Reed is an employee of Vedanta Research. Daly and Topf are employees of the Lupus Foundation of America, which received grant funding to support data collection. This study was a podium presentation at The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Annual Meeting 2018; October 19-24, 2018; Chicago, IL.

Melanocortin peptides: potential targets in systemic lupus erythematosus.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a systemic autoimmune disease resulting in loss of self-tolerance with multiple organs, such as the kidney, skin, joints, and the central nervous system (CNS), being targeted. Numerous immunosuppressant therapies are currently being used for the treatment of SLE, but their clinical utility is somewhat variable because of the clinical heterogeneity. Melanocortins are a family of peptides derived from the common precursor protein pro-opiomelanocortin. These multifunctional peptides activate five subtypes of melanocortin receptors expressed on immune, skin, muscle, bone, and kidney cells and cells within the CNS. Melanocortin peptides have demonstrated a variety of biologic actions including immunomodulation, melanogenesis, and renoprotection. This review aims to introduce the melanocortin system and explore the mechanisms by which they may be beneficial in diseases such as SLE.