Video

WASHINGTON – Researchers have devised a program that can predict severe sepsis or septic shock about 12-30 hours in advance of its onset in hospitalized patients, a feat they hope will allow them to apply early interventions to stave off impending sepsis.

“We’d love to see a change in sepsis mortality. Will earlier recognition and implementation of the sepsis bundle – fluids, antibiotics, etc. – improve outcomes?” wondered Heather M. Giannini, MD, in a video interview at an international conference of the American Thoracic Society.

The computer program works by monitoring all the data that enter a patient’s electronic health record during hospitalization. Researchers developed it and designed it specifically for inpatients who are not in the intensive care unit or emergency department.

Results from initial testing during October-December 2015 in 10,448 patients hospitalized at one of three participating Philadelphia hospitals showed the program predicted subsequent severe sepsis or septic shock with a sensitivity of 26% and a specificity of 98%, reported Dr. Giannini, a researcher in the Center for Evidence-Based Practice at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. Analysis also showed a positive likelihood ratio of 13 for severe sepsis or septic shock actually occurring following an alert generated by the computer program, a level indicating a “very strong” ability to predict sepsis, she said.

Dr. Giannini and her associates developed the prediction program using a technique called “computational machine learning,” an alternative to standard logistic regression modeling that is better suited to analyzing large data sets and can better integrate outlier data points. They took EHR data for all non-ICU, non-ED inpatients at three Philadelphia hospitals during a 3-year period during 2011-2014 and had the program focus particularly on EHR data gleaned from the nearly 1,000 patients who developed severe sepsis or septic shock during the 12 hours preceding the start of these sepsis events. The analysis identified patients as having developed severe sepsis or shock if they had a blood draw positive for infection at the same time as having a blood lactate level above 2.2 mmol/L or a systolic blood pressure below 90 mm Hg.

To create the algorithm the machine-learning device compared the EHR entries for patients who developed severe sepsis or septic shock with EHR data from patients who did not, a process that involved hundred of thousands of data points, Dr. Giannini said. This identified 587 individual types of relevant EHR data entries and ranked them from most important to least important. Important, novel determinants of impending severe sepsis identified this way included anion gap, blood urea nitrogen, and platelet count. The development process also confirmed an important role for many classic markers of septic shock, such as respiration rate, heart rate, and temperature.

The researchers designed the algorithm to have a moderate level of sensitivity to avoid “alert fatigue” from generating too many alarms for impending severe sepsis. Their goal was for clinicians to receive no more than about 10 alerts per day for each hospital.

“We are satisfied with the sensitivity. We felt it was better to have too few alerts rather than overwhelm clinicians. About 10 alerts a day is reasonable,” Dr. Giannini explained. During initial 2015 testing, the system generated a daily average of 11 alerts.

mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

WASHINGTON – Researchers have devised a program that can predict severe sepsis or septic shock about 12-30 hours in advance of its onset in hospitalized patients, a feat they hope will allow them to apply early interventions to stave off impending sepsis.

“We’d love to see a change in sepsis mortality. Will earlier recognition and implementation of the sepsis bundle – fluids, antibiotics, etc. – improve outcomes?” wondered Heather M. Giannini, MD, in a video interview at an international conference of the American Thoracic Society.

The computer program works by monitoring all the data that enter a patient’s electronic health record during hospitalization. Researchers developed it and designed it specifically for inpatients who are not in the intensive care unit or emergency department.

Results from initial testing during October-December 2015 in 10,448 patients hospitalized at one of three participating Philadelphia hospitals showed the program predicted subsequent severe sepsis or septic shock with a sensitivity of 26% and a specificity of 98%, reported Dr. Giannini, a researcher in the Center for Evidence-Based Practice at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. Analysis also showed a positive likelihood ratio of 13 for severe sepsis or septic shock actually occurring following an alert generated by the computer program, a level indicating a “very strong” ability to predict sepsis, she said.

Dr. Giannini and her associates developed the prediction program using a technique called “computational machine learning,” an alternative to standard logistic regression modeling that is better suited to analyzing large data sets and can better integrate outlier data points. They took EHR data for all non-ICU, non-ED inpatients at three Philadelphia hospitals during a 3-year period during 2011-2014 and had the program focus particularly on EHR data gleaned from the nearly 1,000 patients who developed severe sepsis or septic shock during the 12 hours preceding the start of these sepsis events. The analysis identified patients as having developed severe sepsis or shock if they had a blood draw positive for infection at the same time as having a blood lactate level above 2.2 mmol/L or a systolic blood pressure below 90 mm Hg.

To create the algorithm the machine-learning device compared the EHR entries for patients who developed severe sepsis or septic shock with EHR data from patients who did not, a process that involved hundred of thousands of data points, Dr. Giannini said. This identified 587 individual types of relevant EHR data entries and ranked them from most important to least important. Important, novel determinants of impending severe sepsis identified this way included anion gap, blood urea nitrogen, and platelet count. The development process also confirmed an important role for many classic markers of septic shock, such as respiration rate, heart rate, and temperature.

The researchers designed the algorithm to have a moderate level of sensitivity to avoid “alert fatigue” from generating too many alarms for impending severe sepsis. Their goal was for clinicians to receive no more than about 10 alerts per day for each hospital.

“We are satisfied with the sensitivity. We felt it was better to have too few alerts rather than overwhelm clinicians. About 10 alerts a day is reasonable,” Dr. Giannini explained. During initial 2015 testing, the system generated a daily average of 11 alerts.

mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

WASHINGTON – Researchers have devised a program that can predict severe sepsis or septic shock about 12-30 hours in advance of its onset in hospitalized patients, a feat they hope will allow them to apply early interventions to stave off impending sepsis.

“We’d love to see a change in sepsis mortality. Will earlier recognition and implementation of the sepsis bundle – fluids, antibiotics, etc. – improve outcomes?” wondered Heather M. Giannini, MD, in a video interview at an international conference of the American Thoracic Society.

The computer program works by monitoring all the data that enter a patient’s electronic health record during hospitalization. Researchers developed it and designed it specifically for inpatients who are not in the intensive care unit or emergency department.

Results from initial testing during October-December 2015 in 10,448 patients hospitalized at one of three participating Philadelphia hospitals showed the program predicted subsequent severe sepsis or septic shock with a sensitivity of 26% and a specificity of 98%, reported Dr. Giannini, a researcher in the Center for Evidence-Based Practice at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. Analysis also showed a positive likelihood ratio of 13 for severe sepsis or septic shock actually occurring following an alert generated by the computer program, a level indicating a “very strong” ability to predict sepsis, she said.

Dr. Giannini and her associates developed the prediction program using a technique called “computational machine learning,” an alternative to standard logistic regression modeling that is better suited to analyzing large data sets and can better integrate outlier data points. They took EHR data for all non-ICU, non-ED inpatients at three Philadelphia hospitals during a 3-year period during 2011-2014 and had the program focus particularly on EHR data gleaned from the nearly 1,000 patients who developed severe sepsis or septic shock during the 12 hours preceding the start of these sepsis events. The analysis identified patients as having developed severe sepsis or shock if they had a blood draw positive for infection at the same time as having a blood lactate level above 2.2 mmol/L or a systolic blood pressure below 90 mm Hg.

To create the algorithm the machine-learning device compared the EHR entries for patients who developed severe sepsis or septic shock with EHR data from patients who did not, a process that involved hundred of thousands of data points, Dr. Giannini said. This identified 587 individual types of relevant EHR data entries and ranked them from most important to least important. Important, novel determinants of impending severe sepsis identified this way included anion gap, blood urea nitrogen, and platelet count. The development process also confirmed an important role for many classic markers of septic shock, such as respiration rate, heart rate, and temperature.

The researchers designed the algorithm to have a moderate level of sensitivity to avoid “alert fatigue” from generating too many alarms for impending severe sepsis. Their goal was for clinicians to receive no more than about 10 alerts per day for each hospital.

“We are satisfied with the sensitivity. We felt it was better to have too few alerts rather than overwhelm clinicians. About 10 alerts a day is reasonable,” Dr. Giannini explained. During initial 2015 testing, the system generated a daily average of 11 alerts.

mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

MADRID – Recent improvements in the management of rheumatoid arthritis may have had a positive impact on common cardiovascular comorbidities, according to the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Risk ratios (RR) for several CV events in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients were found to be lower for data published after 2000 and up to March 2016 when compared with data published up until 2000. Indeed, comparing these two time periods, French researchers found that the RR for myocardial infarction (MI) were a respective 1.32 and 1.18, for heart failure a respective 1.25 and 1.17, and for CV mortality a respective 1.21 and 1.07.

“Systemic inflammation is the cornerstone of both rheumatoid arthritis and atherosclerosis,” Cécile Gaujoux-Viala, MD, PhD, professor of rheumatology at Montpellier University, Nîmes, France, and chief of the rheumatology service at Nîmes University Hospital, said during a press briefing at the European Congress of Rheumatology.

“Over the past 15 years, new treatment strategies such as ‘tight control,’ ‘treat-to-target,’ methotrexate optimization, and use of biologic DMARDs [disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs] have led to better control of this inflammation,” Dr. Gaujoux-Viala added.

The aim of the meta-analysis was to look at the overall risk for CV events in RA patients versus the general population, she said, as well as to see if there had been any temporal shift by analyzing data obtained within two time periods – before 2000 and after 2000.

A systematic literature review was performed using the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases to search for observational studies that provided data about the occurrence of CV events in RA patients and controls. Of 5,714 papers that included reports of stroke, MI, heart failure, or CV death, 28 had the necessary data that could be used for the meta-analysis. Overall, the 28 studies included 227,871 RA patients, with a mean age of 55 years.

Results showed that RA patients had a 17% increased risk for stroke versus controls overall (P = .002), with a RR of 1.17. The RRs were 1.12 before 2000 and 1.23 after 2000, making stroke the only CV event that did not appear to show a downward trend.

Compared with the general population, RA patients had a 24% excess risk of MI, a 22% excess risk of heart failure, and a 18% excess risk of dying from a CV event (all P less than .00001).

These data provide “confirmation of an increased CV risk in RA patients compared to the general population,” said Dr. Gaujoux-Viala, who also discussed the study and its implications in a video interview.

Commenting on the study, Philip J. Mease, MD, of the University of Washington, Seattle, wondered where the studies used in the meta-analysis had been performed because of the potential impact that reduced access to CV medications or prevention strategies in certain countries could have on the results. However, the investigators did not determine where each of the studies used in the review took place.

Dr. Gaujoux-Viala had no relevant conflicts of interest to disclose.

MADRID – Recent improvements in the management of rheumatoid arthritis may have had a positive impact on common cardiovascular comorbidities, according to the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Risk ratios (RR) for several CV events in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients were found to be lower for data published after 2000 and up to March 2016 when compared with data published up until 2000. Indeed, comparing these two time periods, French researchers found that the RR for myocardial infarction (MI) were a respective 1.32 and 1.18, for heart failure a respective 1.25 and 1.17, and for CV mortality a respective 1.21 and 1.07.

“Systemic inflammation is the cornerstone of both rheumatoid arthritis and atherosclerosis,” Cécile Gaujoux-Viala, MD, PhD, professor of rheumatology at Montpellier University, Nîmes, France, and chief of the rheumatology service at Nîmes University Hospital, said during a press briefing at the European Congress of Rheumatology.

“Over the past 15 years, new treatment strategies such as ‘tight control,’ ‘treat-to-target,’ methotrexate optimization, and use of biologic DMARDs [disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs] have led to better control of this inflammation,” Dr. Gaujoux-Viala added.

The aim of the meta-analysis was to look at the overall risk for CV events in RA patients versus the general population, she said, as well as to see if there had been any temporal shift by analyzing data obtained within two time periods – before 2000 and after 2000.

A systematic literature review was performed using the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases to search for observational studies that provided data about the occurrence of CV events in RA patients and controls. Of 5,714 papers that included reports of stroke, MI, heart failure, or CV death, 28 had the necessary data that could be used for the meta-analysis. Overall, the 28 studies included 227,871 RA patients, with a mean age of 55 years.

Results showed that RA patients had a 17% increased risk for stroke versus controls overall (P = .002), with a RR of 1.17. The RRs were 1.12 before 2000 and 1.23 after 2000, making stroke the only CV event that did not appear to show a downward trend.

Compared with the general population, RA patients had a 24% excess risk of MI, a 22% excess risk of heart failure, and a 18% excess risk of dying from a CV event (all P less than .00001).

These data provide “confirmation of an increased CV risk in RA patients compared to the general population,” said Dr. Gaujoux-Viala, who also discussed the study and its implications in a video interview.

Commenting on the study, Philip J. Mease, MD, of the University of Washington, Seattle, wondered where the studies used in the meta-analysis had been performed because of the potential impact that reduced access to CV medications or prevention strategies in certain countries could have on the results. However, the investigators did not determine where each of the studies used in the review took place.

Dr. Gaujoux-Viala had no relevant conflicts of interest to disclose.

MADRID – Recent improvements in the management of rheumatoid arthritis may have had a positive impact on common cardiovascular comorbidities, according to the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Risk ratios (RR) for several CV events in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients were found to be lower for data published after 2000 and up to March 2016 when compared with data published up until 2000. Indeed, comparing these two time periods, French researchers found that the RR for myocardial infarction (MI) were a respective 1.32 and 1.18, for heart failure a respective 1.25 and 1.17, and for CV mortality a respective 1.21 and 1.07.

“Systemic inflammation is the cornerstone of both rheumatoid arthritis and atherosclerosis,” Cécile Gaujoux-Viala, MD, PhD, professor of rheumatology at Montpellier University, Nîmes, France, and chief of the rheumatology service at Nîmes University Hospital, said during a press briefing at the European Congress of Rheumatology.

“Over the past 15 years, new treatment strategies such as ‘tight control,’ ‘treat-to-target,’ methotrexate optimization, and use of biologic DMARDs [disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs] have led to better control of this inflammation,” Dr. Gaujoux-Viala added.

The aim of the meta-analysis was to look at the overall risk for CV events in RA patients versus the general population, she said, as well as to see if there had been any temporal shift by analyzing data obtained within two time periods – before 2000 and after 2000.

A systematic literature review was performed using the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases to search for observational studies that provided data about the occurrence of CV events in RA patients and controls. Of 5,714 papers that included reports of stroke, MI, heart failure, or CV death, 28 had the necessary data that could be used for the meta-analysis. Overall, the 28 studies included 227,871 RA patients, with a mean age of 55 years.

Results showed that RA patients had a 17% increased risk for stroke versus controls overall (P = .002), with a RR of 1.17. The RRs were 1.12 before 2000 and 1.23 after 2000, making stroke the only CV event that did not appear to show a downward trend.

Compared with the general population, RA patients had a 24% excess risk of MI, a 22% excess risk of heart failure, and a 18% excess risk of dying from a CV event (all P less than .00001).

These data provide “confirmation of an increased CV risk in RA patients compared to the general population,” said Dr. Gaujoux-Viala, who also discussed the study and its implications in a video interview.

Commenting on the study, Philip J. Mease, MD, of the University of Washington, Seattle, wondered where the studies used in the meta-analysis had been performed because of the potential impact that reduced access to CV medications or prevention strategies in certain countries could have on the results. However, the investigators did not determine where each of the studies used in the review took place.

Dr. Gaujoux-Viala had no relevant conflicts of interest to disclose.

The presence of cirrhosis in patients with autoimmune hepatitis markedly increased their risk of hepatocellular carcinoma, according to a systematic review and meta-analysis of 25 cohort studies and 6,528 patients.

Estimated rates of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were 10.1 (6.9-14.7) cases per 1,000 person-years in these patients versus 1.1 (0.6-2.2) cases per 1,000 person-years in patients without cirrhosis at diagnosis, Aylin Tansel, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, and associates reported in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.02.006). Thus, surveillance for HCC “might be cost effective in this population,” they wrote. “However, patients with AIH [autoimmune hepatitis] without cirrhosis at index diagnosis, particularly those identified from general populations, are at an extremely low risk of HCC.”

Source: American Gastroenterological Association

Autoimmune hepatitis may be asymptomatic at presentation or may cause severe acute hepatitis or even fulminant liver failure. Even with immunosuppressive therapy, patients progress to cirrhosis at reported annual rates of 0.1%-8%. HCC is the fastest-growing cause of cancer mortality, and the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) recommends enhanced surveillance for this disease in patients whose annual estimated risk is at least 1.5%. Although the European Association for the Study of Liver Diseases recommends screening for HCC in patients with autoimmune hepatitis and cirrhosis, AASLD makes no such recommendation, the reviewers noted. To study the risk of HCC in patients with autoimmune hepatitis, they searched PubMed, Embase, and reference lists for relevant cohort studies published through June 2016. This work yielded 20 papers and five abstracts with a pooled median follow-up period of 8 years.

The overall pooled incidence of HCC was 3.1 (95% confidence interval, 2.2-4.2) cases per 1,000 person-years, or 1.007% per year, the reviewers wrote. However, the 95% confidence interval for the annual incidence rate nearly encompassed the 1.5% cutoff recommended by AASLD, they said. Furthermore, 5 of 16 studies that investigated the risk of HCC in patients with concurrent cirrhosis reported incidence rates above 1.5%. Among 93 patients who developed HCC in the meta-analysis, only 1 did not have cirrhosis by the time autoimmune hepatitis was diagnosed.

The meta-analysis also linked HCC to older age and Asian ethnicity among patients with autoimmune hepatitis, as has been reported before. Male sex only slightly increased the risk of HCC, but the studies included only about 1,130 men, the reviewers noted. Although the severity of autoimmune hepatitis varied among studies, higher rates of relapse predicted HCC in two cohorts. Additionally, one study linked alcohol abuse to a sixfold higher risk of HCC among patients with autoimmune hepatitis. “These data support careful monitoring of patients with autoimmune hepatitis, particularly older men, patients with multiple autoimmune hepatitis relapses, and those with ongoing alcohol abuse,” the investigators wrote.

They found no evidence of publication bias, but each individual study included at most 15 cases of HCC, so pooled incidence rates were probably imprecise, especially for subgroups, they said. Studies also inconsistently reported HCC risk factors, often lacked comparison groups, and usually did not report the effects of surveillance for HCC.

Dr. Tansel reported receiving support from the National Institutes of Health. The reviewers had no conflicts of interest.

The presence of cirrhosis in patients with autoimmune hepatitis markedly increased their risk of hepatocellular carcinoma, according to a systematic review and meta-analysis of 25 cohort studies and 6,528 patients.

Estimated rates of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were 10.1 (6.9-14.7) cases per 1,000 person-years in these patients versus 1.1 (0.6-2.2) cases per 1,000 person-years in patients without cirrhosis at diagnosis, Aylin Tansel, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, and associates reported in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.02.006). Thus, surveillance for HCC “might be cost effective in this population,” they wrote. “However, patients with AIH [autoimmune hepatitis] without cirrhosis at index diagnosis, particularly those identified from general populations, are at an extremely low risk of HCC.”

Source: American Gastroenterological Association

Autoimmune hepatitis may be asymptomatic at presentation or may cause severe acute hepatitis or even fulminant liver failure. Even with immunosuppressive therapy, patients progress to cirrhosis at reported annual rates of 0.1%-8%. HCC is the fastest-growing cause of cancer mortality, and the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) recommends enhanced surveillance for this disease in patients whose annual estimated risk is at least 1.5%. Although the European Association for the Study of Liver Diseases recommends screening for HCC in patients with autoimmune hepatitis and cirrhosis, AASLD makes no such recommendation, the reviewers noted. To study the risk of HCC in patients with autoimmune hepatitis, they searched PubMed, Embase, and reference lists for relevant cohort studies published through June 2016. This work yielded 20 papers and five abstracts with a pooled median follow-up period of 8 years.

The overall pooled incidence of HCC was 3.1 (95% confidence interval, 2.2-4.2) cases per 1,000 person-years, or 1.007% per year, the reviewers wrote. However, the 95% confidence interval for the annual incidence rate nearly encompassed the 1.5% cutoff recommended by AASLD, they said. Furthermore, 5 of 16 studies that investigated the risk of HCC in patients with concurrent cirrhosis reported incidence rates above 1.5%. Among 93 patients who developed HCC in the meta-analysis, only 1 did not have cirrhosis by the time autoimmune hepatitis was diagnosed.

The meta-analysis also linked HCC to older age and Asian ethnicity among patients with autoimmune hepatitis, as has been reported before. Male sex only slightly increased the risk of HCC, but the studies included only about 1,130 men, the reviewers noted. Although the severity of autoimmune hepatitis varied among studies, higher rates of relapse predicted HCC in two cohorts. Additionally, one study linked alcohol abuse to a sixfold higher risk of HCC among patients with autoimmune hepatitis. “These data support careful monitoring of patients with autoimmune hepatitis, particularly older men, patients with multiple autoimmune hepatitis relapses, and those with ongoing alcohol abuse,” the investigators wrote.

They found no evidence of publication bias, but each individual study included at most 15 cases of HCC, so pooled incidence rates were probably imprecise, especially for subgroups, they said. Studies also inconsistently reported HCC risk factors, often lacked comparison groups, and usually did not report the effects of surveillance for HCC.

Dr. Tansel reported receiving support from the National Institutes of Health. The reviewers had no conflicts of interest.

The presence of cirrhosis in patients with autoimmune hepatitis markedly increased their risk of hepatocellular carcinoma, according to a systematic review and meta-analysis of 25 cohort studies and 6,528 patients.

Estimated rates of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were 10.1 (6.9-14.7) cases per 1,000 person-years in these patients versus 1.1 (0.6-2.2) cases per 1,000 person-years in patients without cirrhosis at diagnosis, Aylin Tansel, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, and associates reported in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.02.006). Thus, surveillance for HCC “might be cost effective in this population,” they wrote. “However, patients with AIH [autoimmune hepatitis] without cirrhosis at index diagnosis, particularly those identified from general populations, are at an extremely low risk of HCC.”

Source: American Gastroenterological Association

Autoimmune hepatitis may be asymptomatic at presentation or may cause severe acute hepatitis or even fulminant liver failure. Even with immunosuppressive therapy, patients progress to cirrhosis at reported annual rates of 0.1%-8%. HCC is the fastest-growing cause of cancer mortality, and the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) recommends enhanced surveillance for this disease in patients whose annual estimated risk is at least 1.5%. Although the European Association for the Study of Liver Diseases recommends screening for HCC in patients with autoimmune hepatitis and cirrhosis, AASLD makes no such recommendation, the reviewers noted. To study the risk of HCC in patients with autoimmune hepatitis, they searched PubMed, Embase, and reference lists for relevant cohort studies published through June 2016. This work yielded 20 papers and five abstracts with a pooled median follow-up period of 8 years.

The overall pooled incidence of HCC was 3.1 (95% confidence interval, 2.2-4.2) cases per 1,000 person-years, or 1.007% per year, the reviewers wrote. However, the 95% confidence interval for the annual incidence rate nearly encompassed the 1.5% cutoff recommended by AASLD, they said. Furthermore, 5 of 16 studies that investigated the risk of HCC in patients with concurrent cirrhosis reported incidence rates above 1.5%. Among 93 patients who developed HCC in the meta-analysis, only 1 did not have cirrhosis by the time autoimmune hepatitis was diagnosed.

The meta-analysis also linked HCC to older age and Asian ethnicity among patients with autoimmune hepatitis, as has been reported before. Male sex only slightly increased the risk of HCC, but the studies included only about 1,130 men, the reviewers noted. Although the severity of autoimmune hepatitis varied among studies, higher rates of relapse predicted HCC in two cohorts. Additionally, one study linked alcohol abuse to a sixfold higher risk of HCC among patients with autoimmune hepatitis. “These data support careful monitoring of patients with autoimmune hepatitis, particularly older men, patients with multiple autoimmune hepatitis relapses, and those with ongoing alcohol abuse,” the investigators wrote.

They found no evidence of publication bias, but each individual study included at most 15 cases of HCC, so pooled incidence rates were probably imprecise, especially for subgroups, they said. Studies also inconsistently reported HCC risk factors, often lacked comparison groups, and usually did not report the effects of surveillance for HCC.

Dr. Tansel reported receiving support from the National Institutes of Health. The reviewers had no conflicts of interest.

Patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis (PVT) who received anticoagulation therapy had nearly fivefold greater odds of recanalization compared with untreated patients, and were no more likely to experience major or minor bleeding, in a pooled analysis of eight studies published in the August issue of Gastroenterology (doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.04.042).

Rates of any recanalization were 71% in treated patients and 42% in untreated patients (P less than .0001), wrote Lorenzo Loffredo, MD, of Sapienza University, Rome, and his coinvestigators. Rates of complete recanalization were 53% and 33%, respectively (P = .002), rates of spontaneous variceal bleeding were 2% and 12% (P = .04), and bleeding affected 11% of patients in each group. Together, the findings “show that anticoagulants are efficacious and safe for treatment of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhotic patients,” although larger, interventional clinical trials are needed to pinpoint the clinical role of anticoagulation in cirrhotic patients with PVT, the reviewers reported.

Source: American Gastroenterological Association

Bleeding from portal hypertension is a major complication in cirrhosis, but PVT affects about 20% of patients and predicts poor outcomes, they noted. Anticoagulation in this setting can be difficult because patients often have concurrent coagulopathies that are hard to assess with standard techniques, such as PT-INR (international normalized ratio). Although some studies support anticoagulating these patients, data are limited. Therefore, the reviewers searched PubMed, the ISI Web of Science, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane database through Feb. 14, 2017, for trials comparing anticoagulation with no treatment in patients with cirrhosis and PVT.

This search yielded eight trials of 353 patients who received low-molecular-weight heparin, warfarin, or no treatment for about 6 months, with a typical follow-up period of 2 years. The reviewers found no evidence of publication bias or significant heterogeneity among the trials. Six studies evaluated complete recanalization, another set of six studies tracked progression of PVT, a third set of six studies evaluated major or minor bleeding events, and four studies evaluated spontaneous variceal bleeding. Compared with no treatment, anticoagulation was tied to a significantly greater likelihood of complete recanalization (pooled odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-7.4; P = .002), a significantly lower chance of PVT progressing (9% vs. 33%; pooled odds ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.06-0.31; P less than .0001), no difference in bleeding rates (11% in each pooled group), and a significantly lower risk of spontaneous variceal bleeding (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.06-0.94; P = .04).

“Metaregression analysis showed that duration of anticoagulation did not influence outcomes,” the reviewers wrote. “Low-molecular-weight heparin, but not warfarin, was significantly associated with a complete PVT resolution as compared to untreated patients, while both low-molecular-weight heparin and warfarin were effective in reducing PVT progression.” That finding merits careful interpretation, however, because most studies on warfarin were retrospective and lacked data on the quality of anticoagulation, they added.

“It is a challenge to treat patients with cirrhosis using anticoagulants because of the perception that the coexistent coagulopathy could promote bleeding,” the researchers wrote. Nonetheless, their analysis suggests that anticoagulation has significant benefits and does not increase bleeding risk, regardless of the severity of liver failure, they concluded.

The reviewers reported having no funding sources or conflicts of interest.

Patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis (PVT) who received anticoagulation therapy had nearly fivefold greater odds of recanalization compared with untreated patients, and were no more likely to experience major or minor bleeding, in a pooled analysis of eight studies published in the August issue of Gastroenterology (doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.04.042).

Rates of any recanalization were 71% in treated patients and 42% in untreated patients (P less than .0001), wrote Lorenzo Loffredo, MD, of Sapienza University, Rome, and his coinvestigators. Rates of complete recanalization were 53% and 33%, respectively (P = .002), rates of spontaneous variceal bleeding were 2% and 12% (P = .04), and bleeding affected 11% of patients in each group. Together, the findings “show that anticoagulants are efficacious and safe for treatment of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhotic patients,” although larger, interventional clinical trials are needed to pinpoint the clinical role of anticoagulation in cirrhotic patients with PVT, the reviewers reported.

Source: American Gastroenterological Association

Bleeding from portal hypertension is a major complication in cirrhosis, but PVT affects about 20% of patients and predicts poor outcomes, they noted. Anticoagulation in this setting can be difficult because patients often have concurrent coagulopathies that are hard to assess with standard techniques, such as PT-INR (international normalized ratio). Although some studies support anticoagulating these patients, data are limited. Therefore, the reviewers searched PubMed, the ISI Web of Science, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane database through Feb. 14, 2017, for trials comparing anticoagulation with no treatment in patients with cirrhosis and PVT.

This search yielded eight trials of 353 patients who received low-molecular-weight heparin, warfarin, or no treatment for about 6 months, with a typical follow-up period of 2 years. The reviewers found no evidence of publication bias or significant heterogeneity among the trials. Six studies evaluated complete recanalization, another set of six studies tracked progression of PVT, a third set of six studies evaluated major or minor bleeding events, and four studies evaluated spontaneous variceal bleeding. Compared with no treatment, anticoagulation was tied to a significantly greater likelihood of complete recanalization (pooled odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-7.4; P = .002), a significantly lower chance of PVT progressing (9% vs. 33%; pooled odds ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.06-0.31; P less than .0001), no difference in bleeding rates (11% in each pooled group), and a significantly lower risk of spontaneous variceal bleeding (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.06-0.94; P = .04).

“Metaregression analysis showed that duration of anticoagulation did not influence outcomes,” the reviewers wrote. “Low-molecular-weight heparin, but not warfarin, was significantly associated with a complete PVT resolution as compared to untreated patients, while both low-molecular-weight heparin and warfarin were effective in reducing PVT progression.” That finding merits careful interpretation, however, because most studies on warfarin were retrospective and lacked data on the quality of anticoagulation, they added.

“It is a challenge to treat patients with cirrhosis using anticoagulants because of the perception that the coexistent coagulopathy could promote bleeding,” the researchers wrote. Nonetheless, their analysis suggests that anticoagulation has significant benefits and does not increase bleeding risk, regardless of the severity of liver failure, they concluded.

The reviewers reported having no funding sources or conflicts of interest.

Patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis (PVT) who received anticoagulation therapy had nearly fivefold greater odds of recanalization compared with untreated patients, and were no more likely to experience major or minor bleeding, in a pooled analysis of eight studies published in the August issue of Gastroenterology (doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.04.042).

Rates of any recanalization were 71% in treated patients and 42% in untreated patients (P less than .0001), wrote Lorenzo Loffredo, MD, of Sapienza University, Rome, and his coinvestigators. Rates of complete recanalization were 53% and 33%, respectively (P = .002), rates of spontaneous variceal bleeding were 2% and 12% (P = .04), and bleeding affected 11% of patients in each group. Together, the findings “show that anticoagulants are efficacious and safe for treatment of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhotic patients,” although larger, interventional clinical trials are needed to pinpoint the clinical role of anticoagulation in cirrhotic patients with PVT, the reviewers reported.

Source: American Gastroenterological Association

Bleeding from portal hypertension is a major complication in cirrhosis, but PVT affects about 20% of patients and predicts poor outcomes, they noted. Anticoagulation in this setting can be difficult because patients often have concurrent coagulopathies that are hard to assess with standard techniques, such as PT-INR (international normalized ratio). Although some studies support anticoagulating these patients, data are limited. Therefore, the reviewers searched PubMed, the ISI Web of Science, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane database through Feb. 14, 2017, for trials comparing anticoagulation with no treatment in patients with cirrhosis and PVT.

This search yielded eight trials of 353 patients who received low-molecular-weight heparin, warfarin, or no treatment for about 6 months, with a typical follow-up period of 2 years. The reviewers found no evidence of publication bias or significant heterogeneity among the trials. Six studies evaluated complete recanalization, another set of six studies tracked progression of PVT, a third set of six studies evaluated major or minor bleeding events, and four studies evaluated spontaneous variceal bleeding. Compared with no treatment, anticoagulation was tied to a significantly greater likelihood of complete recanalization (pooled odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-7.4; P = .002), a significantly lower chance of PVT progressing (9% vs. 33%; pooled odds ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.06-0.31; P less than .0001), no difference in bleeding rates (11% in each pooled group), and a significantly lower risk of spontaneous variceal bleeding (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.06-0.94; P = .04).

“Metaregression analysis showed that duration of anticoagulation did not influence outcomes,” the reviewers wrote. “Low-molecular-weight heparin, but not warfarin, was significantly associated with a complete PVT resolution as compared to untreated patients, while both low-molecular-weight heparin and warfarin were effective in reducing PVT progression.” That finding merits careful interpretation, however, because most studies on warfarin were retrospective and lacked data on the quality of anticoagulation, they added.

“It is a challenge to treat patients with cirrhosis using anticoagulants because of the perception that the coexistent coagulopathy could promote bleeding,” the researchers wrote. Nonetheless, their analysis suggests that anticoagulation has significant benefits and does not increase bleeding risk, regardless of the severity of liver failure, they concluded.

The reviewers reported having no funding sources or conflicts of interest.

MADRID – The rates of both total hip and total knee replacement surgeries dropped among Danish patients with rheumatoid arthritis since the mid-1990s, reductions that were coincident with more widespread use of biologic drugs as well as with other improvements in care, according to analyses of Danish national health records.

“The introduction of guidelines [on biologic drug use] in 2002 and increasing use of biologic drugs [as a result] may have contributed to this positive development,” Lene Dreyer, MD, said at the European Congress of Rheumatology. Other factors that may have also contributed include widespread use of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and adoption of a treat-to-target strategy by many clinicians.

In 1996, the first year studied and before any biologic DMARDs were routinely used for rheumatoid arthritis, the rate of total knee replacement was nearly 6/1,000 person-years among RA patients, compared with a 0.42/1,000 person-years rate in the general adult Danish population, a roughly 14-fold excess among the RA patients, Dr. Dreyer reported. But by 2016, ”this gap had almost disappeared,” she said in a video interview. “It seems like rheumatologists in Denmark are doing a good job” treating RA patients.

That may have been especially true subsequent to 2002, when the Danish Institute for Rational Pharmacotherapy issued recommendations that opened the door to wider use of biologic DMARDs, such as tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, to treat RA patients, noted Dr. Dreyer of Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen. During 2003-2011, use of total knee replacement surgery in RA patients fell by an average annualized rate of 0.2 surgeries/1,000 person-years. But among the general Danish population the average annualized rate of knee surgeries rose by 0.08/1,000 person-years.

“This is a very important finding,” commented Robert Landewé, MD, PhD, professor of rheumatology at the Academic Medical Center in Amsterdam. “It is extremely difficult to test the effect of the introduction of the [biologic DMARD] guidelines,” he cautioned. But he highlighted the positive finding that the excess of hip and knee replacement surgeries in patients with RA, compared with the general population, had recently narrowed.

Dr. Dreyer and her associates used records from the Danish National Patient Register to compare 29,427 patients with incident RA during 1996-2011 with more than 290,000 matched control individuals. All people studied had not undergone knee or hip replacement surgery prior to their entry into the study. The researchers used an “interrupted time series analysis” to examine the possible impact of the introduction of widespread access to biologic DMARDs starting in 2003.

The analysis showed that the rate of total hip replacements in 1996 was nearly 9 surgeries/1,000 person-years among RA patients and nearly 3/1,000 person-years in the general population, a threefold excess for RA patients. This rate fell by an average annual rate of 0.38/1,000 person-years among RA patients both before and after 2002, so that by 2011 the rate was roughly half the 1996 rate, about 4.5/1,000 patient-years. The rate in the general population rose during 1996-2011, and by 2011 was nearly 4/1,000 person-years and so nearly the same as RA patients. Wider availability of biologic DMARDs for RA patients starting in 2003 did not have an apparent impact on the rate of total hip replacement.

In contrast, wider use of biologic DMARDs appeared to have an effect on the rate of total knee surgeries among RA patients. During 1996-2001, the rate rose by an annual average of 0.19/1,000 person-years, very similar to the 0.21/1,000 person-years annual rise in the general Danish population. However, during 2003-2011, the average annual rate of total knee surgery fell by 0.20/1,000 person-years in the RA patients but continued to rise at an annual average rate of 0.08/1,000 person-years in the general population, Dr. Dreyer reported.

Additional Danish registry data exist for patients who received biologic DMARDs, and Dr. Dreyer said that she and her associates hope to use this to further examine the impact of these drugs on patient outcomes.

Dr. Dreyer has received lecture fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme and UCB. Dr. Landewé has received consulting fees from several drug companies.

mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

MADRID – The rates of both total hip and total knee replacement surgeries dropped among Danish patients with rheumatoid arthritis since the mid-1990s, reductions that were coincident with more widespread use of biologic drugs as well as with other improvements in care, according to analyses of Danish national health records.

“The introduction of guidelines [on biologic drug use] in 2002 and increasing use of biologic drugs [as a result] may have contributed to this positive development,” Lene Dreyer, MD, said at the European Congress of Rheumatology. Other factors that may have also contributed include widespread use of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and adoption of a treat-to-target strategy by many clinicians.

In 1996, the first year studied and before any biologic DMARDs were routinely used for rheumatoid arthritis, the rate of total knee replacement was nearly 6/1,000 person-years among RA patients, compared with a 0.42/1,000 person-years rate in the general adult Danish population, a roughly 14-fold excess among the RA patients, Dr. Dreyer reported. But by 2016, ”this gap had almost disappeared,” she said in a video interview. “It seems like rheumatologists in Denmark are doing a good job” treating RA patients.

That may have been especially true subsequent to 2002, when the Danish Institute for Rational Pharmacotherapy issued recommendations that opened the door to wider use of biologic DMARDs, such as tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, to treat RA patients, noted Dr. Dreyer of Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen. During 2003-2011, use of total knee replacement surgery in RA patients fell by an average annualized rate of 0.2 surgeries/1,000 person-years. But among the general Danish population the average annualized rate of knee surgeries rose by 0.08/1,000 person-years.

“This is a very important finding,” commented Robert Landewé, MD, PhD, professor of rheumatology at the Academic Medical Center in Amsterdam. “It is extremely difficult to test the effect of the introduction of the [biologic DMARD] guidelines,” he cautioned. But he highlighted the positive finding that the excess of hip and knee replacement surgeries in patients with RA, compared with the general population, had recently narrowed.

Dr. Dreyer and her associates used records from the Danish National Patient Register to compare 29,427 patients with incident RA during 1996-2011 with more than 290,000 matched control individuals. All people studied had not undergone knee or hip replacement surgery prior to their entry into the study. The researchers used an “interrupted time series analysis” to examine the possible impact of the introduction of widespread access to biologic DMARDs starting in 2003.

The analysis showed that the rate of total hip replacements in 1996 was nearly 9 surgeries/1,000 person-years among RA patients and nearly 3/1,000 person-years in the general population, a threefold excess for RA patients. This rate fell by an average annual rate of 0.38/1,000 person-years among RA patients both before and after 2002, so that by 2011 the rate was roughly half the 1996 rate, about 4.5/1,000 patient-years. The rate in the general population rose during 1996-2011, and by 2011 was nearly 4/1,000 person-years and so nearly the same as RA patients. Wider availability of biologic DMARDs for RA patients starting in 2003 did not have an apparent impact on the rate of total hip replacement.

In contrast, wider use of biologic DMARDs appeared to have an effect on the rate of total knee surgeries among RA patients. During 1996-2001, the rate rose by an annual average of 0.19/1,000 person-years, very similar to the 0.21/1,000 person-years annual rise in the general Danish population. However, during 2003-2011, the average annual rate of total knee surgery fell by 0.20/1,000 person-years in the RA patients but continued to rise at an annual average rate of 0.08/1,000 person-years in the general population, Dr. Dreyer reported.

Additional Danish registry data exist for patients who received biologic DMARDs, and Dr. Dreyer said that she and her associates hope to use this to further examine the impact of these drugs on patient outcomes.

Dr. Dreyer has received lecture fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme and UCB. Dr. Landewé has received consulting fees from several drug companies.

mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

MADRID – The rates of both total hip and total knee replacement surgeries dropped among Danish patients with rheumatoid arthritis since the mid-1990s, reductions that were coincident with more widespread use of biologic drugs as well as with other improvements in care, according to analyses of Danish national health records.

“The introduction of guidelines [on biologic drug use] in 2002 and increasing use of biologic drugs [as a result] may have contributed to this positive development,” Lene Dreyer, MD, said at the European Congress of Rheumatology. Other factors that may have also contributed include widespread use of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and adoption of a treat-to-target strategy by many clinicians.

In 1996, the first year studied and before any biologic DMARDs were routinely used for rheumatoid arthritis, the rate of total knee replacement was nearly 6/1,000 person-years among RA patients, compared with a 0.42/1,000 person-years rate in the general adult Danish population, a roughly 14-fold excess among the RA patients, Dr. Dreyer reported. But by 2016, ”this gap had almost disappeared,” she said in a video interview. “It seems like rheumatologists in Denmark are doing a good job” treating RA patients.

That may have been especially true subsequent to 2002, when the Danish Institute for Rational Pharmacotherapy issued recommendations that opened the door to wider use of biologic DMARDs, such as tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, to treat RA patients, noted Dr. Dreyer of Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen. During 2003-2011, use of total knee replacement surgery in RA patients fell by an average annualized rate of 0.2 surgeries/1,000 person-years. But among the general Danish population the average annualized rate of knee surgeries rose by 0.08/1,000 person-years.

“This is a very important finding,” commented Robert Landewé, MD, PhD, professor of rheumatology at the Academic Medical Center in Amsterdam. “It is extremely difficult to test the effect of the introduction of the [biologic DMARD] guidelines,” he cautioned. But he highlighted the positive finding that the excess of hip and knee replacement surgeries in patients with RA, compared with the general population, had recently narrowed.

Dr. Dreyer and her associates used records from the Danish National Patient Register to compare 29,427 patients with incident RA during 1996-2011 with more than 290,000 matched control individuals. All people studied had not undergone knee or hip replacement surgery prior to their entry into the study. The researchers used an “interrupted time series analysis” to examine the possible impact of the introduction of widespread access to biologic DMARDs starting in 2003.

The analysis showed that the rate of total hip replacements in 1996 was nearly 9 surgeries/1,000 person-years among RA patients and nearly 3/1,000 person-years in the general population, a threefold excess for RA patients. This rate fell by an average annual rate of 0.38/1,000 person-years among RA patients both before and after 2002, so that by 2011 the rate was roughly half the 1996 rate, about 4.5/1,000 patient-years. The rate in the general population rose during 1996-2011, and by 2011 was nearly 4/1,000 person-years and so nearly the same as RA patients. Wider availability of biologic DMARDs for RA patients starting in 2003 did not have an apparent impact on the rate of total hip replacement.

In contrast, wider use of biologic DMARDs appeared to have an effect on the rate of total knee surgeries among RA patients. During 1996-2001, the rate rose by an annual average of 0.19/1,000 person-years, very similar to the 0.21/1,000 person-years annual rise in the general Danish population. However, during 2003-2011, the average annual rate of total knee surgery fell by 0.20/1,000 person-years in the RA patients but continued to rise at an annual average rate of 0.08/1,000 person-years in the general population, Dr. Dreyer reported.

Additional Danish registry data exist for patients who received biologic DMARDs, and Dr. Dreyer said that she and her associates hope to use this to further examine the impact of these drugs on patient outcomes.

Dr. Dreyer has received lecture fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme and UCB. Dr. Landewé has received consulting fees from several drug companies.

mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

MADRID – Measuring the formation of antibodies against biologic agents has no real value in daily practice as their presence or absence does not really change how patients are likely to be treated, Johannes W.J. Bijlsma, MD, observed at the European Congress of Rheumatology.

Consider a female patient who is 59 years old, diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in 2014, he said. She was being treated with methotrexate at a dose of 20 mg with additional glucocorticoids, initially given at a dose of 10 mg, reduced to 5 mg after 2 years, and then stopped. The patient experiences a disease flare, however, and for various other reasons is given a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi). She does well initially but then has another flare, so would there be any point of measuring anti-drug antibodies (ADAbs) as this point? Not really, Dr. Bijlsma suggested, as the same decision to change the biologic agent would probably result if ADAbs were detected or not.

“If I do not measure them, I decide to change the biological. If I measure them and they are present, I change the biological, and if they are absent, I still change the biological,” said Dr. Bijlsma, professor and head of the department of rheumatology and clinical immunology at University Medical Center Utrecht (the Netherlands).

Following the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) use (Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:960-77) would then mean that the first bDMARD, in this case adalimumab (Humira), would be replaced by another biologic with a different mechanism of action or a second TNFi.

“The immune response is always there,” Dr. Bijlsma said. It does not matter what or how it is administered, introducing any foreign protein, humanized or not, will instigate some kind of immune reaction, he said. The extent to which an immune reaction is raised might vary between biologic agents, but it will be there. He cited a review paper (Rheumatology [Oxford]. 2016;55:210-20) showing that the mean estimated occurrence of ADAbs in patients with RA ranges from 0.6% with the interleukin-6-targeting agent tocilizumab (Actemra) to 30% with infliximab (Remicade).

Measuring the level of ADAbs becomes problematic when considering that different biologics will induce different levels of immune response. The level of detection also will be dependent on which of three current types of assays are used. In addition, “humanization of biological agents is not the key point in preventing anti-drug antibodies,” Dr. Bijlsma said, pointing out that the prevalence of ADAbs against adalimumab did not appear to by any lower than ADAbs against infliximab.

Preventing ADAbs can be achieved by co-administering methotrexate or alternating the treatment schedule, Dr. Bijlsma said. Treatment with methotrexate, which is usually continued when patients start a biologic, “diminishes the immune response,” he noted. Indeed, while 50% of patients who are not treated with this conventional DMARD develop ADAbs, only 14%-35% develop them while taking methotrexate, depending on the dose used.

It is likely to be more useful in clinical practice to measure individual patients’ drug trough levels than to measure ADAb levels, he suggested, with dosing continued or adjusted accordingly for each patient. Using drug trough levels to personalize adalimumab treatment has been tested (Ann Rheum Dis. 2015;74:361-8) using a theoretical algorithm based on whether patients achieve a EULAR response at 6 months. If they do achieve a EULAR response and drug trough levels are between 5 and 12 mg/L or greater than 12 mg/L, then adalimumab treatment should continue. However, if the trough levels fall below 5 mg/L, there is probably no point in continuing treatment and this TNFi should be stopped. If patients do not respond and drug testing shows a trough level above 5 mg/L, then a switch to infliximab might be advantageous, while a trough level below this threshold could indicated that a TNFi with a lower immunogenic potential such as etanercept might be a better choice.

Using drug trough levels is still very much research based right now and is not ready for clinical practice just yet, but the theory is that it could help decide if patients should continue, stop, or perhaps switch their biologic, Dr. Bijlsma said.

Dr. Bijlsma spoke about these issues in a video interview at the congress.

Dr. Bijlsma has worked with many of the pharmaceutical companies that produce biologic agents for the management of rheumatic diseases but had no specific disclosures in relation to his comments.

MADRID – Measuring the formation of antibodies against biologic agents has no real value in daily practice as their presence or absence does not really change how patients are likely to be treated, Johannes W.J. Bijlsma, MD, observed at the European Congress of Rheumatology.

Consider a female patient who is 59 years old, diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in 2014, he said. She was being treated with methotrexate at a dose of 20 mg with additional glucocorticoids, initially given at a dose of 10 mg, reduced to 5 mg after 2 years, and then stopped. The patient experiences a disease flare, however, and for various other reasons is given a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi). She does well initially but then has another flare, so would there be any point of measuring anti-drug antibodies (ADAbs) as this point? Not really, Dr. Bijlsma suggested, as the same decision to change the biologic agent would probably result if ADAbs were detected or not.

“If I do not measure them, I decide to change the biological. If I measure them and they are present, I change the biological, and if they are absent, I still change the biological,” said Dr. Bijlsma, professor and head of the department of rheumatology and clinical immunology at University Medical Center Utrecht (the Netherlands).

Following the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) use (Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:960-77) would then mean that the first bDMARD, in this case adalimumab (Humira), would be replaced by another biologic with a different mechanism of action or a second TNFi.

“The immune response is always there,” Dr. Bijlsma said. It does not matter what or how it is administered, introducing any foreign protein, humanized or not, will instigate some kind of immune reaction, he said. The extent to which an immune reaction is raised might vary between biologic agents, but it will be there. He cited a review paper (Rheumatology [Oxford]. 2016;55:210-20) showing that the mean estimated occurrence of ADAbs in patients with RA ranges from 0.6% with the interleukin-6-targeting agent tocilizumab (Actemra) to 30% with infliximab (Remicade).

Measuring the level of ADAbs becomes problematic when considering that different biologics will induce different levels of immune response. The level of detection also will be dependent on which of three current types of assays are used. In addition, “humanization of biological agents is not the key point in preventing anti-drug antibodies,” Dr. Bijlsma said, pointing out that the prevalence of ADAbs against adalimumab did not appear to by any lower than ADAbs against infliximab.

Preventing ADAbs can be achieved by co-administering methotrexate or alternating the treatment schedule, Dr. Bijlsma said. Treatment with methotrexate, which is usually continued when patients start a biologic, “diminishes the immune response,” he noted. Indeed, while 50% of patients who are not treated with this conventional DMARD develop ADAbs, only 14%-35% develop them while taking methotrexate, depending on the dose used.

It is likely to be more useful in clinical practice to measure individual patients’ drug trough levels than to measure ADAb levels, he suggested, with dosing continued or adjusted accordingly for each patient. Using drug trough levels to personalize adalimumab treatment has been tested (Ann Rheum Dis. 2015;74:361-8) using a theoretical algorithm based on whether patients achieve a EULAR response at 6 months. If they do achieve a EULAR response and drug trough levels are between 5 and 12 mg/L or greater than 12 mg/L, then adalimumab treatment should continue. However, if the trough levels fall below 5 mg/L, there is probably no point in continuing treatment and this TNFi should be stopped. If patients do not respond and drug testing shows a trough level above 5 mg/L, then a switch to infliximab might be advantageous, while a trough level below this threshold could indicated that a TNFi with a lower immunogenic potential such as etanercept might be a better choice.

Using drug trough levels is still very much research based right now and is not ready for clinical practice just yet, but the theory is that it could help decide if patients should continue, stop, or perhaps switch their biologic, Dr. Bijlsma said.

Dr. Bijlsma spoke about these issues in a video interview at the congress.

Dr. Bijlsma has worked with many of the pharmaceutical companies that produce biologic agents for the management of rheumatic diseases but had no specific disclosures in relation to his comments.

MADRID – Measuring the formation of antibodies against biologic agents has no real value in daily practice as their presence or absence does not really change how patients are likely to be treated, Johannes W.J. Bijlsma, MD, observed at the European Congress of Rheumatology.

Consider a female patient who is 59 years old, diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in 2014, he said. She was being treated with methotrexate at a dose of 20 mg with additional glucocorticoids, initially given at a dose of 10 mg, reduced to 5 mg after 2 years, and then stopped. The patient experiences a disease flare, however, and for various other reasons is given a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi). She does well initially but then has another flare, so would there be any point of measuring anti-drug antibodies (ADAbs) as this point? Not really, Dr. Bijlsma suggested, as the same decision to change the biologic agent would probably result if ADAbs were detected or not.

“If I do not measure them, I decide to change the biological. If I measure them and they are present, I change the biological, and if they are absent, I still change the biological,” said Dr. Bijlsma, professor and head of the department of rheumatology and clinical immunology at University Medical Center Utrecht (the Netherlands).

Following the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) use (Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76:960-77) would then mean that the first bDMARD, in this case adalimumab (Humira), would be replaced by another biologic with a different mechanism of action or a second TNFi.

“The immune response is always there,” Dr. Bijlsma said. It does not matter what or how it is administered, introducing any foreign protein, humanized or not, will instigate some kind of immune reaction, he said. The extent to which an immune reaction is raised might vary between biologic agents, but it will be there. He cited a review paper (Rheumatology [Oxford]. 2016;55:210-20) showing that the mean estimated occurrence of ADAbs in patients with RA ranges from 0.6% with the interleukin-6-targeting agent tocilizumab (Actemra) to 30% with infliximab (Remicade).

Measuring the level of ADAbs becomes problematic when considering that different biologics will induce different levels of immune response. The level of detection also will be dependent on which of three current types of assays are used. In addition, “humanization of biological agents is not the key point in preventing anti-drug antibodies,” Dr. Bijlsma said, pointing out that the prevalence of ADAbs against adalimumab did not appear to by any lower than ADAbs against infliximab.

Preventing ADAbs can be achieved by co-administering methotrexate or alternating the treatment schedule, Dr. Bijlsma said. Treatment with methotrexate, which is usually continued when patients start a biologic, “diminishes the immune response,” he noted. Indeed, while 50% of patients who are not treated with this conventional DMARD develop ADAbs, only 14%-35% develop them while taking methotrexate, depending on the dose used.

It is likely to be more useful in clinical practice to measure individual patients’ drug trough levels than to measure ADAb levels, he suggested, with dosing continued or adjusted accordingly for each patient. Using drug trough levels to personalize adalimumab treatment has been tested (Ann Rheum Dis. 2015;74:361-8) using a theoretical algorithm based on whether patients achieve a EULAR response at 6 months. If they do achieve a EULAR response and drug trough levels are between 5 and 12 mg/L or greater than 12 mg/L, then adalimumab treatment should continue. However, if the trough levels fall below 5 mg/L, there is probably no point in continuing treatment and this TNFi should be stopped. If patients do not respond and drug testing shows a trough level above 5 mg/L, then a switch to infliximab might be advantageous, while a trough level below this threshold could indicated that a TNFi with a lower immunogenic potential such as etanercept might be a better choice.

Using drug trough levels is still very much research based right now and is not ready for clinical practice just yet, but the theory is that it could help decide if patients should continue, stop, or perhaps switch their biologic, Dr. Bijlsma said.

Dr. Bijlsma spoke about these issues in a video interview at the congress.

Dr. Bijlsma has worked with many of the pharmaceutical companies that produce biologic agents for the management of rheumatic diseases but had no specific disclosures in relation to his comments.

MADRID – The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitor drugs has “been great for cancer but bad for rheumatology.”

That’s the gist of the immunologic adverse effect fallout from the immunomodulatory revolution that’s recently swept oncology, Leonard Calabrese, DO, said in a video interview during the European Congress of Rheumatology.

Results from a recent survey of U.S. rheumatologists run by Dr. Calabrese and his associates showed that “more than a quarter” now have seen at least one patient who experienced activation of a rheumatologic disease after starting treatment with an immune checkpoint inhibitor, said Dr. Calabrese, head of the section of clinical immunology at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio.

Unlike most other immunological adverse effects caused by immune checkpoint inhibitors, the rheumatologic complications usually don’t resolve when treatment stops, he added.

These adverse effects represent a new wrinkle for the practice of rheumatology and are now something that clinicians must familiarize themselves with, Dr. Calabrese advised.

Dr. Calabrese reported that he is a consultant to Bristol-Myers Squibb.

mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

MADRID – The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitor drugs has “been great for cancer but bad for rheumatology.”

That’s the gist of the immunologic adverse effect fallout from the immunomodulatory revolution that’s recently swept oncology, Leonard Calabrese, DO, said in a video interview during the European Congress of Rheumatology.

Results from a recent survey of U.S. rheumatologists run by Dr. Calabrese and his associates showed that “more than a quarter” now have seen at least one patient who experienced activation of a rheumatologic disease after starting treatment with an immune checkpoint inhibitor, said Dr. Calabrese, head of the section of clinical immunology at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio.

Unlike most other immunological adverse effects caused by immune checkpoint inhibitors, the rheumatologic complications usually don’t resolve when treatment stops, he added.

These adverse effects represent a new wrinkle for the practice of rheumatology and are now something that clinicians must familiarize themselves with, Dr. Calabrese advised.

Dr. Calabrese reported that he is a consultant to Bristol-Myers Squibb.

mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

MADRID – The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitor drugs has “been great for cancer but bad for rheumatology.”

That’s the gist of the immunologic adverse effect fallout from the immunomodulatory revolution that’s recently swept oncology, Leonard Calabrese, DO, said in a video interview during the European Congress of Rheumatology.

Results from a recent survey of U.S. rheumatologists run by Dr. Calabrese and his associates showed that “more than a quarter” now have seen at least one patient who experienced activation of a rheumatologic disease after starting treatment with an immune checkpoint inhibitor, said Dr. Calabrese, head of the section of clinical immunology at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio.

Unlike most other immunological adverse effects caused by immune checkpoint inhibitors, the rheumatologic complications usually don’t resolve when treatment stops, he added.

These adverse effects represent a new wrinkle for the practice of rheumatology and are now something that clinicians must familiarize themselves with, Dr. Calabrese advised.

Dr. Calabrese reported that he is a consultant to Bristol-Myers Squibb.

mzoler@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @mitchelzoler

CHICAGO – William J. Gradishar, MD, outlines key research on breast cancer treatment presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

In a video interview, Dr. Gradishar, the Betsy Bramsen Professor of Breast Oncology at Northwestern University, Chicago, discusses the take-home messages on pertuzumab for HER2+ breast cancer, PARP inhibitors for BRCA-mutated breast cancer, and CDK4/6 inhibitors for ER+ breast cancers.

In another video interview, Katherine O’Brien of the Metastatic Breast Cancer Network provides the patient advocate view on this years’ meeting.

lnikolaides@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @NikolaidesLaura

CHICAGO – William J. Gradishar, MD, outlines key research on breast cancer treatment presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

In a video interview, Dr. Gradishar, the Betsy Bramsen Professor of Breast Oncology at Northwestern University, Chicago, discusses the take-home messages on pertuzumab for HER2+ breast cancer, PARP inhibitors for BRCA-mutated breast cancer, and CDK4/6 inhibitors for ER+ breast cancers.

In another video interview, Katherine O’Brien of the Metastatic Breast Cancer Network provides the patient advocate view on this years’ meeting.

lnikolaides@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @NikolaidesLaura

CHICAGO – William J. Gradishar, MD, outlines key research on breast cancer treatment presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

In a video interview, Dr. Gradishar, the Betsy Bramsen Professor of Breast Oncology at Northwestern University, Chicago, discusses the take-home messages on pertuzumab for HER2+ breast cancer, PARP inhibitors for BRCA-mutated breast cancer, and CDK4/6 inhibitors for ER+ breast cancers.

In another video interview, Katherine O’Brien of the Metastatic Breast Cancer Network provides the patient advocate view on this years’ meeting.

lnikolaides@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @NikolaidesLaura

MADRID – The results of the first trial of a biologic agent in children less than 2 years of age with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA) suggest that tocilizumab is likely to be effective in this age group.

“sJIA is the most severe form of childhood arthritis, and as you are aware, it’s the most difficult to treat as well,” said Navita L. Mallalieu, PhD, director of clinical pharmacology at Roche Innovation Center New York, the company that funded the study.

Tocilizumab (Actemra) has been available for the treatment of sJIA, both in the United States and the European Union since 2011, she observed at the European Congress of Rheumatology, but only for children aged 2 years or older at the current time.

Because of this prior history of use in sJIA, “we have confidence in the safety profile, and so we were able to go to the next step of testing children who were even younger than 2 years of age,” Dr. Mallalieu said in a video interview.

[polldaddy:9771949]

Dr. Mallalieu presented findings from an open-label, single-arm, phase I trial that evaluated a 12 mg/kg dosing regimen of tocilizumab, which was given intravenously every 2 weeks for 12 weeks. Eleven children were studied who had a mean age of 1.3 years and active disease for at least 1 month despite treatment with glucocorticoids or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

The primary endpoint was the pharmacokinetics of tocilizumab in this younger patient population, and secondary endpoints were safety, pharmacodynamics, and exploring the efficacy over 12 weeks on top of stable background therapy, she explained.

Results showed that tocilizumab in children under 2 years of age could achieve pharmacokinetics similar to those seen in older children in the TENDER trial (N Engl J Med. 2012;367:2385-95), which is the trial that helped the biologic get licensed for use in the older sJIA population. Reductions in soluble interleukin-6 receptor, C-reactive protein, and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate were seen, again to a similar extent as seen in the TENDER trial. There was also an indication that similar reductions in the Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score (JADAS)-71 score could be achieved, Dr. Mallalieu reported.

While the pattern and nature of adverse events were similar to those seen in the TENDER trial, there were more cases of hypersensitivity in this phase I study. Four cases of hypersensitivity were clinically confirmed, three of which were deemed serious. The three serious cases were observed at day 15, with two of the cases associated with multiple signs and symptoms that were confounded by either subclinical macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) or a faster infusion rate. One patient had urticaria and was hospitalized for observation.

MADRID – The results of the first trial of a biologic agent in children less than 2 years of age with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA) suggest that tocilizumab is likely to be effective in this age group.

“sJIA is the most severe form of childhood arthritis, and as you are aware, it’s the most difficult to treat as well,” said Navita L. Mallalieu, PhD, director of clinical pharmacology at Roche Innovation Center New York, the company that funded the study.

Tocilizumab (Actemra) has been available for the treatment of sJIA, both in the United States and the European Union since 2011, she observed at the European Congress of Rheumatology, but only for children aged 2 years or older at the current time.

Because of this prior history of use in sJIA, “we have confidence in the safety profile, and so we were able to go to the next step of testing children who were even younger than 2 years of age,” Dr. Mallalieu said in a video interview.

[polldaddy:9771949]

Dr. Mallalieu presented findings from an open-label, single-arm, phase I trial that evaluated a 12 mg/kg dosing regimen of tocilizumab, which was given intravenously every 2 weeks for 12 weeks. Eleven children were studied who had a mean age of 1.3 years and active disease for at least 1 month despite treatment with glucocorticoids or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

The primary endpoint was the pharmacokinetics of tocilizumab in this younger patient population, and secondary endpoints were safety, pharmacodynamics, and exploring the efficacy over 12 weeks on top of stable background therapy, she explained.

Results showed that tocilizumab in children under 2 years of age could achieve pharmacokinetics similar to those seen in older children in the TENDER trial (N Engl J Med. 2012;367:2385-95), which is the trial that helped the biologic get licensed for use in the older sJIA population. Reductions in soluble interleukin-6 receptor, C-reactive protein, and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate were seen, again to a similar extent as seen in the TENDER trial. There was also an indication that similar reductions in the Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score (JADAS)-71 score could be achieved, Dr. Mallalieu reported.

While the pattern and nature of adverse events were similar to those seen in the TENDER trial, there were more cases of hypersensitivity in this phase I study. Four cases of hypersensitivity were clinically confirmed, three of which were deemed serious. The three serious cases were observed at day 15, with two of the cases associated with multiple signs and symptoms that were confounded by either subclinical macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) or a faster infusion rate. One patient had urticaria and was hospitalized for observation.

MADRID – The results of the first trial of a biologic agent in children less than 2 years of age with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA) suggest that tocilizumab is likely to be effective in this age group.

“sJIA is the most severe form of childhood arthritis, and as you are aware, it’s the most difficult to treat as well,” said Navita L. Mallalieu, PhD, director of clinical pharmacology at Roche Innovation Center New York, the company that funded the study.

Tocilizumab (Actemra) has been available for the treatment of sJIA, both in the United States and the European Union since 2011, she observed at the European Congress of Rheumatology, but only for children aged 2 years or older at the current time.

Because of this prior history of use in sJIA, “we have confidence in the safety profile, and so we were able to go to the next step of testing children who were even younger than 2 years of age,” Dr. Mallalieu said in a video interview.

[polldaddy:9771949]

Dr. Mallalieu presented findings from an open-label, single-arm, phase I trial that evaluated a 12 mg/kg dosing regimen of tocilizumab, which was given intravenously every 2 weeks for 12 weeks. Eleven children were studied who had a mean age of 1.3 years and active disease for at least 1 month despite treatment with glucocorticoids or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

The primary endpoint was the pharmacokinetics of tocilizumab in this younger patient population, and secondary endpoints were safety, pharmacodynamics, and exploring the efficacy over 12 weeks on top of stable background therapy, she explained.

Results showed that tocilizumab in children under 2 years of age could achieve pharmacokinetics similar to those seen in older children in the TENDER trial (N Engl J Med. 2012;367:2385-95), which is the trial that helped the biologic get licensed for use in the older sJIA population. Reductions in soluble interleukin-6 receptor, C-reactive protein, and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate were seen, again to a similar extent as seen in the TENDER trial. There was also an indication that similar reductions in the Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score (JADAS)-71 score could be achieved, Dr. Mallalieu reported.

While the pattern and nature of adverse events were similar to those seen in the TENDER trial, there were more cases of hypersensitivity in this phase I study. Four cases of hypersensitivity were clinically confirmed, three of which were deemed serious. The three serious cases were observed at day 15, with two of the cases associated with multiple signs and symptoms that were confounded by either subclinical macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) or a faster infusion rate. One patient had urticaria and was hospitalized for observation.