Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectiveTo compare long-term efficacy of remission-maintenance regimens in patients with newly diagnosed or relapsing antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCA)-associated vasculitides.MethodsThe 28-month Maintenance of Remission using Rituximab in Systemic ANCA-associated Vasculitis trial compared rituximab with azathioprine to maintain remission in patients with newly diagnosed or relapsing granulomatosis with polyangiitis, microscopic polyangiitis or renal-limited ANCA-associated vasculitis. Thereafter, prospective patient follow-up lasted until month 60. The primary endpoint was the major-relapse rate at month 60. Relapse and serious adverse event-free survival were also assessed.ResultsAmong the 115 enrolled patients, only one was lost to follow-up at month 60. For the azathioprine and rituximab groups, respectively, at month 60, the major relapse-free survival rates were 49.4% (95% CI 38.0% to 64.3%) and 71.9% (95% CI 61.2% to 84.6%) (p=0.003); minor and major relapse-free survival rates were 37.2% (95% CI 26.5% to 52.2%) and 57.9% (95% CI 46.4% to 72.2%) (p=0.012); overall survival rates were 93.0% (95% CI 86.7% to 99.9%) and 100% (p=0.045) and cumulative glucocorticoid use was comparable. Quality-adjusted time without symptoms and toxicity analysis showed that rituximab-treated patients had 12.6 months more without relapse or toxicity than those given azathioprine (p<0.001). Antiproteinase-3-ANCA positivity and azathioprine arm were independently associated with higher risk of relapse. HRs of positive ANCA to predict relapse increased over time.ConclusionThe rate of sustained remission for ANCA-associated vasculitis patients, following rituximab-based or azathioprine-based maintenance regimens, remained superior over 60 months with rituximab, with better overall survival.Trial registration numberNCT00748644.

The C5a receptor inhibitor avacopan was superior to a tapering schedule of prednisone with respect to remission of ANCA-associated vasculitis at 52 weeks. There were fewer glucocorticoid-associated adverse events in the avacopan group than in the prednisone group, and serious infections did not differ substantially between the two groups.

Conventional management of Crohn's disease features incremental use of therapies. However, early combined immunosuppression (ECI), with a TNF antagonist and antimetabolite might be a more effective strategy. We compared the efficacy of ECI with that of conventional management for treatment of Crohn's disease. In this open-label cluster randomised controlled trial (Randomised Evaluation of an Algorithm for Crohn's Treatment, REACT), we included community gastroenterology practices from Belgium and Canada that were willing to be assigned to either of the study groups, participate in all aspects of the study, and provide data on up to 60 patients with Crohn's disease. These practices were randomly assigned (1:1) to either ECI or conventional management. The computer-generated randomisation was minimised by country and practice size. Up to 60 consecutive adult patients were assessed within practices. Patients who were aged 18 years or older; documented to have Crohn's disease; able to speak or understand English, French, or Dutch; able to access a telephone; and able to provide written informed consent were followed up for 2 years. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients in corticosteroid-free remission (Harvey-Bradshaw Index score ≤4) at 12 months at the practice level. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01030809. This study took place between March 15, 2010, and Oct 1, 2013. Of the 60 practices screened, 41 were randomly assigned to either ECI (n=22) or conventional management (n=19). Two practices (one in each group) discontinued because of insufficient resources. 921 (85%) of the 1084 patients at ECI practices and 806 (90%) of 898 patients at conventional management practices completed 12 months follow-up and were included in an intention-to-treat analysis. The 12 month practice-level remission rates were similar at ECI and conventional management practices (66·0% [SD 14·0] and 61·9% [16·9]; adjusted difference 2·5%, 95% CI −5·2% to 10·2%, p=0·5169). The 24 month patient-level composite rate of major adverse outcomes defined as occurrence of surgery, hospital admission, or serious disease-related complications was lower at ECI practices than at conventional management practices (27·7% and 35·1%, absolute difference [AD] 7·3%, hazard ratio [HR]: 0·73, 95% CI 0·62 to 0·86, p=0·0003). There were no differences in serious drug-related adverse events. Although ECI was not more effective than conventional management for controlling Crohn's disease symptoms, the risk of major adverse outcomes was lower. The latter finding should be considered hypothesis-generating for future trials. ECI was not associated with an increased risk of serious drug-related adverse events or mortality. AbbVie Pharmaceuticals.

ObjectivesIn patients with IBD experiencing an immune-mediated loss of response (LOR) to antitumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF), algorithms recommend a switch of anti-TNF without immunosuppressive drug. The aim of our study was to compare in these patients two strategies: either switch to a second anti-TNF alone or with addition of azathioprine (AZA). After randomisation outcomes (time to clinical and pharmacokinetic failure) were compared between the two groups during a 2-year follow-up period.DesignConsecutive IBD patients in immune-mediated LOR to a first optimised anti-TNF given in monotherapy were randomised to receive either AZA or nothing with induction by a second anti-TNF in both arms. Clinical failure was defined for Crohn’s disease (CD) as a Harvey-Bradshaw index ≥5 associated with a faecal calprotectin level >250 µg/g stool and for UC as a Mayo score >5 with endoscopic subscore >1 or as the occurrence of adverse events requiring to stop treatment. Unfavourable pharmacokinetics of the second anti-TNF were defined by the appearance of undetectable trough levels of anti-TNF with high antibodies (drug-sensitive assay) or by that of antibodies (drug-tolerant assay).ResultsNinety patients (48 CDs) were included, and 45 of them received AZA after randomisation. The second anti-TNF was adalimumab or infliximab in 40 and 50 patients, respectively. Rates of clinical failure and occurrence of unfavourable pharmacokinetics were higher in monotherapy compared with combination therapy (p<0.001; median time of clinical failure since randomisation 18 vs >24 months). At 24 months, survival rates without clinical failure and without appearance of unfavourable pharmacokinetics were respectively 22 versus 77% and 22% versus 78% (p<0.001 for both) in monotherapy versus combination therapy. Only the use of combination therapy was associated with favourable outcomes after anti-TNF switch.ConclusionIn case of immune-mediated LOR to a first anti-TNF, AZA should be associated with the second anti-TNF.Trial registration number03580876.

ObjectivesA prospective randomised trial to compare two different durations of maintenance immunosuppressive therapy for the prevention of relapse in anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCA)-associated vasculitis (AAV).MethodsPatients with AAV were recruited 18–24 months after diagnosis if they were in stable remission after cyclophosphamide/prednisolone-based induction followed by azathioprine/prednisolone maintenance therapy. They were randomised (1:1) to receive continued azathioprine/prednisolone to 48 months from diagnosis (continuation group) or to withdraw azathioprine/prednisolone by 24 months (withdrawal group). The primary endpoint was the relapse risk, from randomisation to 48 months from diagnosis.ResultsOne hundred and seventeen patients were randomised and 110 remained to the trial end. At entry, median serum creatinine was 116 μmol/L (range 58–372), 53% were ANCA positive. The percentage of patients presenting with relapse was higher in the withdrawal than in the continuation treatment group (63% vs 22%, p<0.0001, OR 5.96, 95% CI 2.58 to 13.77). ANCA positivity at randomisation was associated with relapse risk (51% vs 29%, p=0.017, OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.16 to 5.68). Renal function, ANCA specificity, vasculitis type and age were not predictive of relapse. Severe adverse events were more frequent in the continuation than withdrawal groups (nine vs three events), but the continuation group had better renal outcome (0 vs 4 cases of end-stage renal disease), with no difference in patient survival.ConclusionsProlonged remission maintenance therapy with azathioprine/prednisolone, beyond 24 months after diagnosis reduces relapse risk out to 48 months and improves renal survival in AAV.Trial registration numberISRCTN13739474

BackgroundIt is unknown which maintenance therapy is the most effective option for patients admitted for an acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC) episode responding to intravenous steroids.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre, parallel-group, open-label randomised controlled trial among 23 French centres in thiopurine and biologics-naïve adults admitted for ASUC responding to intravenous steroids. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive infliximab (IFX) and azathioprine (AZA) with a 7-day steroid tapering scheme (IFX+AZA arm) or AZA and conventional standardised steroid tapering regimen (AZA arm). The primary composite endpoint was treatment failure at week 52, defined as the absence of steroid-free clinical remission, the absence of endoscopic response, the use of a prohibited treatment for relapse, severe adverse event leading to treatment interruption, colectomy or death. Multiple imputation for missing data was performed.FindingsAmong the 64 patients randomised (Lichtiger score 13.5±2.0; median age of 34.5 (P25–P75 26.3–50.3) years, median C reactive protein of 29.0 (12.8–96.8) mg/L at baseline): 32 were assigned to the IFX+AZA arm and 32 to the AZA arm. In the ITT population, treatment failure at week 52 was observed in 22/27 (81.5%) in the AZA arm and 16/30 (53.3%) in the IFX+AZA arm (risk ratio 3.85, 95% CI (1.15 to 12.88), p=0.03). 29 adverse events were severe, including 13 disease exacerbations, 6 severe infections without any difference between both arms.InterpretationCombination therapy with IFX+AZA was more effective at 1 year than AZA alone to avoid treatment failure in patients with ASUC responding to intravenous steroids.Trial registration number NCT02425852.

VSL#3 is a high-potency probiotic mixture that has been used successfully in the treatment of pouchitis. The primary end point of the study was to assess the effects of supplementation with VSL#3 in patients affected by relapsing ulcerative colitis (UC) who are already under treatment with 5-aminosalicylic acid (ASA) and/or immunosuppressants at stable doses. A total of 144 consecutive patients were randomly treated for 8 weeks with VSL#3 at a dose of 3,600 billion CFU/day (71 patients) or with placebo (73 patients). In all, 65 patients in the VSL#3 group and 66 patients in the placebo group completed the study. The decrease in ulcerative colitis disease activity index (UCDAI) scores of 50% or more was higher in the VSL#3 group than in the placebo group (63.1 vs. 40.8; per protocol (PP) P=0.010, confidence interval (CI)₉₅(%) 0.51-0.74; intention to treat (ITT) P=0.031, CI₉₅(%) 0.47-0.69). Significant results with VSL#3 were recorded in an improvement of three points or more in the UCDAI score (60.5% vs. 41.4%; PP P=0.017, CI₉₅(%) 0.51-0.74; ITT P=0.046, CI₉₅(%) 0.47-0.69) and in rectal bleeding (PP P=0.014, CI₉₅(%) 0.46-0.70; ITT P=0.036, CI₉₅(%) 0.41-0.65), whereas stool frequency (PP P=0.202, CI₉₅(%) 0.39-0.63; ITT P=0.229, CI₉₅(%) 0.35-0.57), physician's rate of disease activity (PP P=0.088, CI₉₅(%) 0.34-0.58; ITT P=0.168, CI₉₅(%) 0.31-0.53), and endoscopic scores (PP P=0.086, CI₉₅(%) 0.74-0.92; ITT P=0.366, CI₉₅(%) 0.66-0.86) did not show statistical differences. Remission was higher in the VSL#3 group than in the placebo group (47.7% vs. 32.4%; PP P=0.069, CI₉₅(%) 0.36-0.60; ITT P=0.132, CI₉₅(%) 0.33-0.56). Eight patients on VSL#3 (11.2%) and nine patients on placebo (12.3%) reported mild side effects. VSL#3 supplementation is safe and able to reduce UCDAI scores in patients affected by relapsing mild-to-moderate UC who are under treatment with 5-ASA and/or immunosuppressants. Moreover, VSL#3 improves rectal bleeding and seems to reinduce remission in relapsing UC patients after 8 weeks of treatment, although these parameters do not reach statistical significance.

Background Alopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune pathology manifested by loss of hair. Objective To evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and azathioprine in patients with AA and variants. Methods In this double-blind randomized controlled trail (RCT) carried out at the Department of Dermatology, Medical Teaching Institute-Lady Reading Hospital (MTI-LRH), Peshawar, Pakistan, patients aged ≥ 12 years diagnosed with AA, alopecia totalis (AT) or alopecia universalis (AU) with minimum 50% scalp hair loss for a period ≥ 06 years were included. Patients were randomly assigned to receive oral tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily (Group I) or oral azathioprine 2 mg/kg body weight once daily (Group II). The primary endpoint was Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score, evaluated at baseline and 06 months follow-up. Safety was consistently assessed during the study. Results A total of 104 patients underwent random allocation into either the tofacitinib group ( n  = 52) or the azathioprine group ( n  = 52). The mean (SD) age of patients was 20.23 (7.14) years and 22.26 (8.07) years, while the mean (SD) disease duration was 6.59 (4.01) years and 7.98 (4.40) years in in Group I and II, respectively. Overall, 40 (38.5%) patients were adolescents while 70 (67.3%) were male. 52 (50%) had AA, 37 (35.5%) had AT and 15 (14.5%) had AU. Mean baseline SALT score in tofacitinib group was 91.02 ± 10.21 and azathioprine group was 91.02 ± 10.63, which at 06 months follow-up improved to 14.1 ± 24.6 and 63.9 ± 33.9, respectively (difference, 11.5 points; 95% confidence interval, 38.3–61.3, p  < 0.0001). Overall, no major adverse effects and no difference among the minor adverse effects in the two groups (04 adverse events for tofacitinib group and 08 for azathioprine group: p  = 0.23) was observed. Conclusions Efficacy of tofacitinib was significantly higher than azathioprine, whilst both drugs were well-tolerated in patients with AA and variants.

BackgroundThe risk:benefit ratio of concomitant use of thiopurines with scheduled adalimumab (ADA) maintenance therapy for Crohn’s disease is controversial. The aim of this study is to identify the influence of withdrawal of thiopurines in patients in remission with combination therapy in an open-label, randomised, controlled trial (DIAMOND2; UMIN000009596).MethodsPatients in corticosteroid-free clinical remission (CFCR) for ≥ 6 months with ADA (40 mg, s.c., every other week) scheduled maintenance combined with thiopurines were randomised into two groups, “continue” (Con) or “discontinue” (Dis) group of thiopurines, whereas all other patients kept receiving scheduled ADA maintenance therapy for 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients in CFCR at week 52. Secondary endpoints were endoscopic remission (ER), trough levels of ADA in serum, and safety.ResultsFifty patients were randomised to Con or Dis groups. Characteristics of patients were not significantly different between the groups. CFCR and ER prevalence at week 52 were not significantly different between groups (log rank, P = 0.704, P = 1.000, respectively). Trough levels of ADA were not significantly different between groups (P = 0.515). The proportion of patients with AAA positivity at week 52 was not significantly different (P = 0.437). ER at week 0 was involved in ER and triple remission at week 52. No serious adverse effects were observed in either group.ConclusionContinuation of thiopurines > 6 months offers no clear benefit over scheduled ADA monotherapy. CFCR, ER, and ADA trough level at week 52 were not significantly different between groups. ER at week 0 may be involved in better long-term clinical outcomes.

We compared protection of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and azathioprine (AZA) against acute cellular rejection (ACR) and chronic allograft nephropathy (CAN) in kidney transplant recipients on steroid-free, low-dose cyclosporine (CsA) microemulsion maintenance immunosuppression. ATHENA, a pragmatic, prospective, multicenter trial conducted by 6 Italian transplant centers, compared the outcomes of 233 consenting recipients of a first deceased donor kidney transplant induced with low-dose thymoglobulin and basiliximab and randomized to MMF (750 mg twice/day, n = 119) or AZA (75 to 125 mg/day, n = 114) added-on maintenance low-dose CsA microemulsion and 1-week steroid. In patients without acute clinical or subclinical rejections, CsA dose was progressively halved. Primary endpoint was biopsy-proven CAN. Analysis was by intention to treat. Participants were included between June 2007 and July 2012 and followed up to August 2016. Between-group donor and recipient characteristics, donor/recipient mismatches, and follow-up CsA blood levels were similar. During a median (interquartile range (IQR)) follow-up of 47.7 (44.2 to 48.9) months, 29 of 87 biopsied patients on MMF (33.3%) versus 31 of 88 on AZA (35.2%) developed CAN (hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 1.147 (0.691 to 1.904, p = 0.595). Twenty and 21 patients on MMF versus 34 and 14 on AZA had clinical [HR (95% CI): 0.58 (0.34 to 1.02); p = 0.057) or biopsy-proven subclinical [HR (95% CI): 1.49 (0.76 to 2.92); p = 0.249] ACR, respectively. Combined events [HR (95% CI): 0.85 (0.56 to 1.29); p = 0.438], patient and graft survival, delayed graft function (DGF), 3-year glomerular filtration rate (GFR) [53.8 (40.6;65.7) versus 49.8 (36.8;62.5) mL/min/1.73 m2, p = 0.50], and adverse events (AEs) were not significantly different between groups. Chronicity scores other than CAN predict long-term graft outcome. Study limitations include small sample size and unblinded design. In this study, we found that in deceased donor kidney transplant recipients on low-dose CsA and no steroids, MMF had no significant benefits over AZA. This finding suggests that AZA, due to its lower costs, could safely replace MMF in combination with minimized immunosuppression. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00494741; EUDRACT 2006-005604-14.