Investigational agents for polymyalgia rheumatica treatment: assessing the critical needs for future development.

INTRODUCTION: Polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) is an inflammatory rheumatic disorder characterized by pain and stiffness in the shoulder and pelvic girdles, constitutional symptoms, and elevated acute-phase reactants. Glucocorticoids (GCs) remain the first-choice treatment for PMR, but relapses are common. Identification of steroid-sparing agents is therefore of utmost importance. AREAS COVERED: The efficacy of conventional immunosuppressive drugs is controversial. The use of interleukin (IL)-6 receptor inhibitors proved to be effective and safe in treating PMR patients. Currently, there are 12 ongoing clinical trials exploring potential treatments such as leflunomide, low-dose IL-2, rituximab, abatacept, secukinumab, Janus kinase inhibitors, and selective inhibitors like SPI-62 and ABBV 154. EXPERT OPINION: The high efficacy of IL-6 R receptor inhibitors as well as the numerous drug trials currently recruiting suggest that several therapeutic options will be available in the near future. Accurate diagnosis and early stratification of PMR patients according to the giant cell arteritis-PMR Spectrum Disease 'GPSD' and potential risk factors for relapsing disease or GC-related adverse events are crucial to identify patients who would benefit most from GC-sparing agents. The development of internationally accepted definitions for remission and relapse is urgently needed. Early referral strategies to specialist settings would improve disease stratification and personalized treatment.

Safety of sarilumab in a Japanese population with rheumatoid arthritis by age group: Data from an interim analysis of a post-marketing surveillance study.

OBJECTIVES: Using data from a post-marketing surveillance, this interim subgroup analysis investigated the safety of sarilumab in younger (<65 years) and older patients (≥65 and ≥75 years) with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: During this interim analysis, patients who were treated with sarilumab in Japan were enrolled between June 2018-2021. Data collected by 12 January 2022 were analysed, with adverse drug events monitored over 52 weeks. RESULTS: Of 972 patients with available data, proportion of patients aged <65 years, ≥65 years and ≥75 years were 40.8%, 59.2% and 27.8%, respectively. Most patients (95.5%) received the standard 200 mg dose of sarilumab as the initial dose. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 24.6% of patients, with serious events accounting for 6.4% of cases. No malignancy and low incidences of adverse drug reactions of special interest were reported across all age groups (<65 years, 7.8%; ≥65 years, 8.2%; ≥75 years, 8.5%). When stratified by absolute neutrophil count above and below the lower limit of normal, there were no numerical differences in incidences of serious and non-serious infections between age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of age, sarilumab therapy was well tolerated by patients with rheumatoid arthritis, with no new safety signals reported in this study.

Cancer risk with tocilizumab/sarilumab, abatacept, and rituximab treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a Danish cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate cancer risk in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with tocilizumab/sarilumab, abatacept, or rituximab compared with those who received tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and compared with biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARD) naïve RA patients. METHODS: Nationwide registry-based cohort study of RA patients initiating treatment with tocilizumab/sarilumab, abatacept, rituximab, TNFi, and bDMARD-naive patients their second type of conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD). Patients were identified in DANBIO and followed for cancer from 2006-2020. Patients could contribute multiple treatments, with person years (PYRS), deaths, and cancers allocated to each treatment group in a 'latest type of treatment' manner. Inverse probability of treatment weighting and weighted cause-specific Cox models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for cancer in each tocilizumab/sarilumab, abatacept, and rituximab group compared with TNFI and bDMARD naïve groups, respectively. RESULTS: In total, 21 982 treatment initiations, 96 475 PYRS, and 1423 cancers were identified. There were no statistically significant increased HRs for overall cancer in tocilizumab/sarilumab, abatacept, or rituximab treatment groups (HRs ranged from 0.7-1.1). More than five years of abatacept exposure showed a non-significantly increased HR compared with TNFi (HR 1.41, 95% confidence intervals CI 0.74-2.71). For hematological cancers, rituximab treatment showed non-significantly reduced HRs: vs TNFi (HR 0.09; 95%CI 0.00-2.06) and bDMARD-naïve (HR 0.13; 95%CI 0.00-1.89). CONCLUSION: Treatment with tocilizumab/sarilumab, abatacept, or rituximab in RA patients was not associated with increased risks of cancer compared with TNFi-treated and with bDMARD-naïve RA patients in a real-world setting.

Effect of Anti-Interleukin-6 Agents on Psychopathology in a Sample of Patients with Post-COVID-19 Syndrome: An Observational Study.

Interleukin 6 (IL-6) receptor inhibitors tocilizumab and sarilumab have recently been approved for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). They also affect mood, even though their effect on the post-COVID-19 syndrome-related psychopathology still has to be investigated. The aim of this study was to investigate their effect on psychopathology in a sample of patients with post-COVID-19 syndrome. We included 246 patients (34% female, 66% male) aged 18-75 years who had been hospitalized for COVID. Patients were split into those who received anti-IL-6 receptor agents (Anti-IL-6-R, N = 88) and those who did not (Ctrl, N = 158). The former group was further split into those receiving tocilizumab (TOC, N = 67) and those receiving sarilumab (SAR, N = 21). Groups were compared based on clinical characteristics before and during COVID-19 as well as on physical and psychiatric symptoms after COVID-19. Ctrl had less psychiatric and physical symptoms during hospitalization and more post-COVID-19 diarrhea, headache, cough, and dyspnea upon exertion than those receiving IL-6-receptor inhibitors. Ctrl also showed greater difficulties in emotion regulation. These differences were driven by TOC vs. Ctrl, whereas differences between SAR and Ctrl or TOC did not reach significance. IL-6 receptor inhibitors are related to a lower post-COVID-19 illness burden and seem to be effective in emotion regulation. Further research is needed to confirm these findings.

Effectiveness and safety of sarilumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A multicenter, retrospective, inverse probability of treatment-weighted analysis based on the FRAB-registry.

OBJECTIVE: The efficacy and safety of sarilumab (SARI) were investigated in real-world clinical practice in Japan. METHOD: Subjects were 121 rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients in 23 medical institutions in Fukuoka Prefecture, Japan, who started treatment with SARI between May 2018 and November 2021. Data on the SARI starting dose, patients' baseline characteristics, disease activity, and blood test data at the start of treatment, as well as follow-up data on the SARI dose, disease activity, and adverse events until Week 52. Safety and the continuation rate calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method were evaluated, and the effectiveness of treatment at 1 year was assessed using the clinical disease activity index (CDAI). Patients' baseline characteristics for which significant differences were evident were adjusted with a propensity score by using the inverse probability of treatment-weighting (IPTW) method. RESULTS: The continuation rate at Week 52 was 66.1%. The CDAI showed significant improvement from Week 4 that was maintained until Week 52. Comparisons conducted after IPTW adjustment for patients' baseline characteristics for which significant differences were evident revealed no significant differences at Week 52 between the groups classified by higher or lower body mass index (BMI) (p = 0.231), serious comorbidities (p = 0.973), MTX use (p = 0.321), or prior treatment with ≤ 1 or ≥ 2 biologic and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) (p = 0.765). CONCLUSIONS: The results showed that the efficacy of SARI is not affected by BMI, comorbidities, MTX use, or the number of prior b/tsDMARDs, and no new safety concerns were apparent. Key Points • This is the first real-world clinical study to report on the efficacy and safety of SARI in Japan. The results of this study indicate that the efficacy of SARI was not affected by BMI, comorbidities, MTX use, or number of previous b/tsDMARDs. • It was shown that SARI can be used in a Japanese population without any new side effects.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of tocilizumab, sarilumab, and olokizumab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the relative efficacy and safety of olokizumab, tocilizumab, and sarilumab in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who were intolerant or responding inadequately to methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the efficacy and safety of olokizumab, tocilizumab, and sarilumab in RA patients who were intolerant or responding inadequately to MTX. RESULTS: Six RCTs comprising 4439 patients met the inclusion criteria. Tocilizumab, sarilumab, olokizumab, and adalimumab treatments achieved a significant American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20) response rate compared with placebo. However, tocilizumab was associated with the most favorable surface area using the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) for the ACR20 response rate. The ranking probability based on the SUCRA indicated that tocilizumab treatment had the highest probability of providing the best ACR20 response rate, followed by sarilumab, olokizumab every 2 weeks (Q2W), olokizumab Q4W, adalimumab 40 mg, and placebo. The ACR50 and 70 response rates showed a distribution pattern similar to that of the ACR20 response rate. However, olokizumab Q4W had a higher ranking probability than olokizumab Q2W. The SUCRA rating showed that the placebo was the best intervention with the least adverse events (AEs) and withdrawal due to AEs, followed by interleukin­6 inhibitors. CONCLUSION: Tocilizumab, sarilumab, and olokizumab are more effective than adalimumab and have similar efficacy and safety in RA patients with inadequate responses to MTX.

Safety and effectiveness of sarilumab in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis refractory to previous treatments: An interim analysis of a post-marketing surveillance.

OBJECTIVES: An interim analysis of post-marketing surveillance data to assess the safety and effectiveness of sarilumab in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis refractory to previous treatment. METHODS: The interim analysis included patients who initiated sarilumab therapy between June 2018 and January 2021. The primary objective of this surveillance was safety. RESULTS: In total, 1036 patients were enrolled and registered by 12 January 2021 (interim cut-off date). Of these, 678 were included in the safety analysis [75.4% female; mean age (± standard deviation) 65.8 ± 13.0 years]. Adverse drug reactions, defined as adverse events classified as possibly or probably related to sarilumab, were reported in 170 patients (incidence: 25.1%), with white blood cell count decreased (4.4%) and neutrophil count decreased (1.6%) most frequently reported. Serious haematologic disorders (3.4%) and serious infections (including tuberculosis) (2.5%) were the most frequently reported priority surveillance items. No malignant tumour was reported. An absolute neutrophil count (ANC) below the minimum standard value did not increase the incidence of serious infections. CONCLUSIONS: Sarilumab was well tolerated, and no new safety signals were noted in this analysis. There was no difference in the frequency of serious infections between patients with an ANC below or above normal.

Risk factors for thromboembolic events in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia in a general ward and requiring treatment with oxygen.

PURPOSE: To assess risk factors for arterial and venous thromboses (AVT) in patients hospitalized in general wards for COVID-19 pneumonia and requiring oxygen therapy. METHODS: Our study was based on three randomized studies conducted as part of the CORIMUNO-19 platform in France between 27 March and 26 April 2020. Adult inpatients with COVID-19 pneumonia requiring at least 3 l/min of oxygen but not ventilation were randomized to receive standard care alone or standard care plus biologics. Patients were followed up for 3 months, and adverse events were documented. Risk factor for AVT and bleeding was identified by analyzing clinical, laboratory, and treatment data at baseline among the 315 patients with complete datasets. A Fine and Gray model was used to take account of competing events. RESULTS: During the 3-month follow-up period, 39 AVT occurred in 38 (10%) of the 388 patients: 26 deep vein thromboses and/or pulmonary embolisms in 25 (6%) patients, and 14 arterial thrombotic events in 13 (3%) patients. A history of diabetes at inclusion [sHR (95% CI) = 2.65 (1.19-5.91), P = .017] and the C-reactive protein (CRP) level (sHR = 1 [1-1.01], P = .049) were significantly associated with an elevated risk of thrombosis. Obesity was not associated with a higher risk of thrombosis (sHR = 1.01 [0.4-2.57], P = .98). The CRP level and diabetes were not risk factors for hemorrhage. CONCLUSION: Among patients hospitalized in general wards for COVID-19 pneumonia during the first wave of the epidemic, diabetes (but not obesity) and a high CRP level were risk factors for AVT. The use of higher doses of anticoagulant in these high-risk patients could be considered.

Impact of IL6R genetic variants on treatment efficacy and toxicity response to sarilumab in rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Sarilumab, an IL-6 receptor antagonist, is a first-line biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug for rheumatoid arthritis. The identification of genetic biomarkers as predictors of response to sarilumab could allow for a personalized treatment strategy to improve clinical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 62 patients treated with sarilumab to determine whether single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in the IL6R gene could predict efficacy and toxicity responses. Six SNPs previously described in the IL6R gene (rs12083537, rs11265618, rs4329505, rs2228145, rs4537545, and rs4845625) were genotyped in DNA samples obtained from these patients. Using parametric tests, we evaluated the association between these polymorphisms and clinicopathological features. Treatment response was assessed six months after treatment initiation. Satisfactory response was based on EULAR criteria. Low disease activity was determined according to DAS28 and CDAI and quantitative improvements in DAS28 and CDAI scores. RESULTS: Three SNPs (rs4845625, rs4329505 and rs11265618) were significantly associated with response outcomes. All of the SNPs, except for rs12083537, had at least one significant association with dyslipidemia or hepatotoxicity. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the potential clinical value of SNPs, particularly rs4845625, as potentially useful biomarkers to predict response to sarilumab in patients with RA.

Biological therapy in polymyalgia rheumatica.

INTRODUCTION: Polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) is an inflammatory rheumatic disease of the elderly, treated mainly with systemic corticosteroids. The frequency of side effects of steroids is high in this aged population and increased due to comorbidities. The use of biological treatments could be of interest in this condition. AREAS COVERED: This review takes into account literature data from the PubMed and clinical trial databases concerning the results of the use of biological treatments in PMR, in terms of efficacy and safety of these treatments. EXPERT OPINION: Current data do not allow us to identify any particular efficacy of the various anti-TNF agents used in the treatment of PMR. Anti-interleukin 6 agents (tocilizumab, sarilumab) have shown consistent efficacy results, suggesting a particularly interesting steroid-sparing effect in the population under consideration. The safety profile appears acceptable. Other biologic targeted treatments are currently being evaluated. Anti-interleukin-6 agents may well have a place in the therapeutic strategy for PMR, particularly for patients with steroid-resistant disease or at high risk of complications of corticosteroid therapy.

Safety and Outcomes With Combination Therapy With Sarilumab and Baricitinib for Severe COVID-19 Respiratory Infection in Cancer Patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to describe the clinical outcomes of combination therapy with sarilumab and baricitinib for severe novel Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) infection in cancer patients. With this study, we aim to evaluate the role of expanded immunotherapy for severely ill patients with COVID-19 respiratory infections with limited options. The secondary objective is to assess the safety of combination therapy with sarilumab and baricitinib for severe COVID-19 infection. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to Moffitt Cancer Center with COVID-19 infection between January 2020 and April 2022. Our research received a waiver to sign consent by the patients according to our institutional IRB because it was free of any risk for the patients and respected the patient's privacy. Following the Institutional IRB approval and relevant Equator guidelines, we collected information on patients with severe COVID-19 infection and received sarilumab and baricitinib. We evaluated the survival rate and safety of combination therapy. All the patient's information was de-identified to protect their information according to Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). RESULTS: Four patients were included in the data analysis. Two survived, and two of them died (Table 1). All the patients that survived were previously vaccinated. Among the two patients who died, one was vaccinated, and the other was unvaccinated. All the patients tolerated the combination therapy well, and none of the patients who survived developed secondary infections or COVID-19-associated complications beyond 12 months of discharge. CONCLUSION: Our study explores the potential safe combination use of different immune modulators targeting multiple pathways of the inflammatory cascade for severe and refractory COVID-19 respiratory infections in high-risk oncology patients. The small number of patients in our observational study was a limitation. A larger sample of patients will be needed to conclude more precisely the efficacy of the combination therapy of sarilumab and baricitinib for refractory cases of severe COVID-19 respiratory infection. Moreover, exploring other cytokine release signaling pathway targets may be the key to significantly reducing inflammation and further pulmonary fibrosis with chronic unbearable respiratory sequela.

A phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sarilumab in patients with giant cell arteritis.

BACKGROUND: Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is primarily treated with glucocorticoids (GCs), which have substantial toxicity. Tocilizumab, an interleukin-6-receptor inhibitor (IL-6Ri), showed beneficial effects in GCA, leading to its approval. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of sarilumab (another IL-6Ri) in GCA. METHODS: This Phase 3, double-blind study comprised a 52-week treatment period and a 24-week follow-up phase. Eligible GCA patients were randomized to receive sarilumab 200 mg (SAR200 + 26W) or 150 mg (SAR150 + 26W) with a 26-week GC taper, or placebo with a 52-week (PBO + 52W) or 26-week (PBO + 26W) GC taper. The primary efficacy endpoint was sustained remission (SR) at week 52. Additional endpoints were SR at week 24, cumulative GC dose, and safety. The study was discontinued prematurely due to protracted recruitment timelines, because of the impact of COVID-19. Therefore, only descriptive statistics were summarized. RESULTS: Of the planned 360 subjects, only 83 were randomized and 36 were included in the week 52 analysis. At week 52, 46% (n = 6/13) of patients in SAR200 + 26W, 43% (n = 3/7) in SAR150 + 26W, 30% (n = 3/10) in PBO + 52W, and 0 (n = 0/6) in PBO + 26W taper groups achieved SR. Sensitivity analyses, excluding acute-phase reactants from the SR definition, showed similar results for SAR groups, but 60% (n = 6/10) in PBO + 52W and 17% (n = 1/6) in PBO + 26W taper groups achieved SR at week 52. Similar findings were noted at week 24. The proportions of patients who adhered to GC taper from week 12 through week 52 in each group were as follows: 46% (n = 6/13, SAR200 + 26W), 43% (n = 3/7, SAR150 + 26W), 60% (n = 6/10, PBO + 52W), and 33% (n = 2/6, PBO + 26W). The median actual cumulative GC dose received in the SAR200 + 26W group was lower than other groups. Most patients (80-100%) experienced treatment-emergent adverse events, with similar incidences reported across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Owing to the small sample size due to the early termination, it is difficult to draw clear conclusions from this study. There were no unexpected safety findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03600805. Registered on July 26, 2018.

Effect of sarilumab on unacceptable pain and inflammation control in Japanese patients with moderately-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis: Post hoc analysis of a Phase III study (KAKEHASI).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of sarilumab on unacceptable pain [UP; visual analogue scale (VAS) >40 mm] and inflammation in patients with moderately-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the KAKEHASI study, 243 patients received methotrexate with sarilumab 150 or 200 mg or placebo every other week, over 52 weeks. The proportion of patients with UP and correlations of changes in pain VAS from baseline with uncontrolled inflammation (C-reactive protein ≥1 mg/dl) and disease activity indices were assessed. RESULTS: Almost 80% of patients (192/243) had UP at baseline, including ∼60% of patients with uncontrolled inflammation. Among patients receiving sarilumab, inflammation decreased rapidly, with 90% of patients achieving controlled inflammation by Week 2, while 63.1% continued to have UP. The proportion of patients with UP further decreased by Week 16 (28.5%, sarilumab vs. 64.0%, placebo). By Week 52, only ∼10% of patients had UP. Changes in pain VAS correlated with most disease activity indices and patient-reported outcomes. However, marked correlations between changes in pain VAS and C-reactive protein were observed only at Week 16. CONCLUSION: Sarilumab treatment reduced UP and inflammation in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal trial of sarilumab for the treatment of glucocorticoid-dependent sarcoidosis.

OBJECTIVES: Effective steroid-sparing therapies for the treatment of sarcoidosis are lacking; interleukin-6 (IL-6) antagonists may reduce sarcoidosis disease activity. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of the IL-6 receptor antagonist, sarilumab, in subjects with glucocorticoid-dependent sarcoidosis. METHODS: This phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal trial enrolled 15 subjects with biopsy-proven sarcoidosis at Stanford University from November 2019 to September 2022. In Period 1, subjects were treated with open-label sarilumab 200mg subcutaneously every two weeks for 16 weeks, with predefined tapering of prednisone. Subjects who completed Period 1 without a sarcoidosis flare entered Period 2 and were randomized to continue sarilumab or to receive matching placebo for 12 weeks. Endpoints included flare-free survival, as well as changes in pulmonary function tests, chest imaging, patient reported outcomes, and laboratory values. RESULTS: Fifteen subjects were enrolled in the study (median age 57 years, 80% male, 73.3% White), and 10 subjects successfully completed Period 1. During Period 1, 4 of 15 subjects (26.7%) discontinued due to worsening of their sarcoidosis, and CT chest imaging worsened in 5 of 15 subjects (35.7%). During Period 2, 0 of 2 subjects in the sarilumab group and 1 of 8 subjects (12.5%) in the placebo group had a flare. Treatment with sarilumab 200 mg was generally well tolerated in subjects with sarcoidosis. CONCLUSION: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal trial, a meaningful signal for improvement in subjects with sarcoidosis treated with sarilumab was not observed. Given the small numbers in this study, no definitive conclusions can be drawn. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04008069.

IL-6-induced response of human osteoblasts from patients with rheumatoid arthritis after inhibition of the signaling pathway.

Interleukin (IL-) 6 is a critical factor in inflammatory processes of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This is of high interest as the progression of RA may lead to the implantation of joint endoprostheses, which is associated with a pro-inflammatory increase in IL-6 in the periprosthetic tissue. Biological agents such as sarilumab have been developed to inhibit IL-6-mediated signaling. However, IL-6 signaling blockade should consider the inhibition of inflammatory processes and the regenerative functions of IL-6. This in vitro study investigated whether inhibiting IL-6 receptors can affect the differentiation of osteoblasts isolated from patients with RA. Since wear particles can be generated at the articular surfaces of endoprostheses leading to osteolysis and implant loosening, the potential of sarilumab to inhibit wear particle-induced pro-inflammatory processes should be investigated. Both in monocultures and indirect co-cultures with osteoclast-like cells (OLCs), human osteoblasts were stimulated with 50 ng/mL each of IL-6 + sIL-6R and in combination with sarilumab (250 nM) to characterize cell viability and osteogenic differentiation capacity. Furthermore, the influence of IL-6 + sIL-6R or sarilumab on viability, differentiation, and inflammation was evaluated in osteoblasts exposed to particles. Stimulation with IL-6 + sIL-6R and sarilumab did not affect cell viability. Except for the significant induction of RUNX2 mRNA by IL-6 + sIL-6R and a significant reduction with sarilumab, no effects on cell differentiation and mineralization could be detected. Furthermore, the different stimulations did not affect the osteogenic and osteoclastic differentiation of co-cultured cells. Compared to the osteoblastic monocultures, a decreased release of IL-8 was triggered in the co-culture. Among these, treatment with sarilumab alone resulted in the greatest reduction of IL-8. The co-culture also showed clearly increased OPN concentrations than the respective monocultures, with OPN secretion apparently triggered by the OLCs. Particle exposure demonstrated decreased osteogenic differentiation using different treatment strategies. However, sarilumab administration caused a trend toward a decrease in IL-8 production after stimulation with IL-6 + sIL-6R. The blockade of IL-6 and its pathway have no significant effect on the osteogenic and osteoclastic differentiation of bone cells derived from patients with RA. Nonetheless, observed effects on the reduced IL-8 secretion need further investigation.

Efficacy and safety of interleukin-6 receptor antagonists in adult patients admitted to intensive care unit with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

The purpose of the systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of interleukin-6 receptor (IL-6) antagonists (tocilizumab, sarilumab) in adult patients with severe or critical COVID-19. A systematic review of the literature was conducted in Medline, Cochrane and Embase databases, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov from the inception dates to10 January 2023. Randomized clinical trials comparing IL-6 receptor antagonists (tocilizumab, sarilumab) with a placebo or usual care treatment for adult patients with severe or critical COVID-19 were identified. Two independent reviewers performed the assessment and selection of eligible studies, assessed study quality and extracted data. Relative risk (RR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (CI) with random-effects models was performed in meta-analysis. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the quality of the evidence. The search retrieved a total of 11 RCTs involving 5028 participants were eligible for meta-analysis. Our findings suggest that as the new drug used in adult patients with severe or critical COVID-19, IL-6 antagonists (tocilizumab, sarilumab) may reduce the length of ICU stay and hospital stay. However, they did not significantly increase the risks of serious adverse events and did not reduce all-cause mortality (28-day, 14-day, and 7-day).

Real-World Sarilumab Use and Rule Testing to Predict Treatment Response in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: Findings from the RISE Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical trial findings may not be generalizable to routine practice. This study evaluated sarilumab effectiveness in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and tested the real-world applicability of a response prediction rule, derived from trial data using machine learning (based on C-reactive protein [CRP] > 12.3 mg/l and seropositivity [anticyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies, ACPA +]). METHODS: Sarilumab initiators from the ACR-RISE Registry, with ≥ 1 prescription on/after its FDA approval (2017-2020), were divided into three cohorts based on progressively restrictive criteria: Cohort A (had active disease), Cohort B (met eligibility criteria of a phase 3 trial in RA patients with inadequate response/intolerance to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors [TNFi]), and Cohort C (characteristics matched to the phase 3 trial baseline). Mean changes in Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) were evaluated at 6 and 12 months. In a separate cohort, predictive rule was tested based on CRP levels and seropositive status (ACPA and/or rheumatoid factor); patients were categorized into rule-positive (seropositive with CRP > 12.3 mg/l) and rule-negative groups to compare the odds of achieving CDAI low disease activity (LDA)/remission and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) over 24 weeks. RESULTS: Among sarilumab initiators (N = 2949), treatment effectiveness was noted across cohorts, with greater improvement noted for Cohort C at 6 and 12 months. Among the predictive rule cohort (N = 205), rule-positive (vs. rule-negative) patients were more likely to reach LDA (odds ratio: 1.5 [0.7, 3.2]) and MCID (1.1 [0.5, 2.4]). Sensitivity analyses (CRP > 5 mg/l) showed better response to sarilumab in rule-positive patients. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world setting, sarilumab demonstrated treatment effectiveness, with greater improvements in the most selective population, mirroring phase 3 TNFi-refractory and rule-positive RA patients. Seropositivity appeared a stronger driver for treatment response than CRP, although optimization of the rule in routine practice requires further data.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a condition that may cause joint damage, if untreated. Sarilumab is an advanced medication, approved for treating moderate-to-severe RA in patients not responding to initial standard medicines. Clinical trials have shown that sarilumab improves RA symptoms; however, some people do not respond. This is a common problem in RA treatment. Physicians measure proteins in people's blood (called biomarkers; e.g., anticyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies [ACPA], C-reactive protein [CRP], and rheumatoid factor [RF]) to predict a medicine's response. A previous study showed that people with positive blood tests for ACPA and CRP (> 12.3 mg/l) responded well to sarilumab; this study was based on machine learning (a branch of science using computers) and identified factors that could be linked to treatment benefits. The present study analyzed routine data of 2949 people from the ACR-RISE Registry and showed an improvement in RA symptoms after 6 and 12 months of sarilumab, with a greater improvement noted in patients previously treated with other medicines. Biomarkers were tested in 205 people to check whether they could predict treatment response in day-to-day life. People were called rule-positive if they tested positive for RF and/or ACPA with CRP > 12.3 mg/l, and otherwise rule-negative. After 24 weeks of treatment, rule-positive people had a greater chance of disease improvement than rule-negative people. These results showed the benefits of sarilumab in RA in routine care and suggested the usefulness of machine learning in identifying biomarkers that physicians can use to make treatment decisions.

Role of IP-10 to Predict Clinical Progression and Response to IL-6 Blockade With Sarilumab in Early COVID-19 Pneumonia. A Subanalysis of the SARICOR Clinical Trial.

Background: The Clinical Trial of Sarilumab in Adults With COVID-19 (SARICOR) showed that patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia and increased levels of interleukin (IL)-6 might benefit from blockade of the IL-6 pathway. However, the benefit from this intervention might not be uniform. In this subanalysis, we sought to determine if other immunoactivation markers, besides IL-6, could identify which subgroup of patients benefit most from this intervention. Methods: The SARICOR trial was a phase II, open-label, multicenter, controlled trial (July 2020-March 2021) in which patients were randomized to receive usual care (UC; control group), UC plus a single dose of sarilumab 200 mg (sarilumab-200 group), or UC plus a single dose of sarilumab 400 mg (sarilumab-400 group). Patients who had baseline serum samples for cytokine determination (IL-8, IL-10, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, interferon-inducible protein [IP]-10) were included in this secondary analysis. Progression to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) according to cytokine levels and treatment received was evaluated. Results: One hundred one (88%) of 115 patients enrolled in the SARICOR trial had serum samples (control group: n = 33; sarilumab-200: n = 33; sarilumab-400: n = 35). Among all evaluated biomarkers, IP-10 showed the strongest association with treatment outcome. Patients with IP-10 ≥2500 pg/mL treated with sarilumab-400 had a lower probability of progression (13%) compared with the control group (58%; hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.04-0.90; P = .04). Conversely, patients with IP-10 <2500 pg/mL did not show these differences. Conclusions: IP-10 may predict progression to ARDS in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and IL-6 levels >40 pg/mL. Importantly, IP-10 value <2500 pg/mL might discriminate those individuals who might not benefit from sarilumab therapy among those with high IL-6 levels.

Interleukin-6 and Macular Edema: A Review of Outcomes with Inhibition.

This paper describes the current literature on the molecular pathophysiology of interleukin-6 (IL-6) in the genesis of macular edema and on the outcomes with IL-6 inhibitors in the treatment of non-infectious macular edema. The role of IL-6 in the development of macular edema has been well elucidated. IL-6 is produced by multiple cells of the innate immune system and leads to a higher likelihood of developing autoimmune inflammatory diseases, such as non-infectious uveitis, through a variety of mechanisms. These include increasing the helper T-cell population over the regulatory T-cell population and leading to the increased expression of inflammatory cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha. In addition to being key in the generation of uveitis and subsequent macular edema through these inflammatory pathways, IL-6 also can lead to the development of macular edema through other pathways. IL-6 induces the production of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and facilitates vascular leakage by downregulating tight junction proteins in retinal endothelial cells. Clinically, the use of IL-6 inhibitors has been found to be efficacious primarily in the context of treatment-resistant non-infectious uveitis and secondary macular edema. IL-6 is a key cytokine in retinal inflammation and macular edema. It is thus not surprising that the use of IL-6 inhibitors in treatment-resistant macular edema in the setting of non-infectious uveitis has been well documented as an effective treatment option. The use of IL-6 inhibitors in macular edema secondary to non-uveitic processes has only begun to be explored.