Explore the vast range of titles available.

ObjectivesLupus nephritis (LN) is a frequent complication of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Severe (proliferative) forms of LN are treated with induction immunosuppressive therapy (IST), followed by maintenance IST, to target remission and avoid relapses. The optimal duration of maintenance IST is unknown. The WIN-Lupus trial tested whether IST discontinuation after 2‒3 years was non-inferior to IST continuation for two more years in proliferative LN.MethodsWIN-Lupus was an investigator-initiated multicentre randomised controlled trial. Patients receiving maintenance IST with azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil for 2–3 years, and hydroxychloroquine, were randomised (1:1) into two groups: (1) IST continuation and (2) IST discontinuation. The primary endpoint was the relapse rate of proliferative LN at 24 months. Main secondary endpoints were the rate of severe SLE flares, survival without renal relapse or severe flare, adverse events.ResultsBetween 2011 and 2016, 96 patients (out of 200 planned) were randomised in WIN-Lupus: IST continuation group (n=48), IST discontinuation group (n=48). Relapse of proliferative LN occurred in 5/40 (12.5%) patients with IST continuation and in 12/44 (27.3%) patients with IST discontinuation (difference 14.8% (95% CI −1.9 to 31.5)). Non-inferiority was not demonstrated for relapse rate; time to relapse did not differ between the groups. Severe SLE flares (renal or extrarenal) were less frequent in patients with IST continuation (5/40 vs 14/44 patients; p=0.035). Adverse events did not differ between the groups.ConclusionsNon-inferiority of maintenance IST discontinuation after 2‒3 years was not demonstrated for renal relapse. IST discontinuation was associated with a higher risk of severe SLE flares.Trial registration number NCT01284725.

This phase 3 multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 2-year trial compared the efficacy and safety of intravenous belimumab with those of placebo, plus standard therapy, in patients with active lupus nephritis. More patients who received belimumab had a primary efficacy renal response than those who received placebo.

Azathioprine is used as a first-line treatment to prevent relapses of neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). Tocilizumab has been reported to reduce NMOSD disease activity in retrospective case reports. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of tocilizumab and azathioprine in patients with highly relapsing NMOSD. We did an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial at six hospitals in China. We recruited adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with highly relapsing NMOSD diagnosed according to 2015 International Panel for Neuromyelitis Optica Diagnosis criteria, who had an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score of 7·5 or lower, and had a history of at least two clinical relapses during the previous 12 months or three relapses during the previous 24 months with at least one relapse within the previous 12 months. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous tocilizumab (8 mg/kg every 4 weeks) or oral azathioprine (2–3 mg/kg per day) by an independent statistician using computer-generated randomisation software with permuted blocks of four. The central review committee, EDSS raters, laboratory personnel, and radiologists were masked to the treatment assignment, but investigators and patients were aware of treatment allocation. The minimum planned duration of treatment was 60 weeks following randomisation. The primary outcome was time to first relapse in the full analysis set, which included all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug, and the per-protocol population, which included all patients who used azathioprine or tocilizumab as monotherapy. For the analyses of the primary outcome, the patients were prespecified into two subgroups according to concomitant autoimmune disease status. Safety was assessed in the full analysis set. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03350633. Between Nov 1, 2017, and Aug 3, 2018, we enrolled 118 patients, of whom 59 were randomly assigned to tocilizumab and 59 were randomly assigned to azathioprine. All 118 patients received one dose of study drug and were included in the full analysis set. 108 participants were included in the per-protocol analysis (56 in the tocilizumab group and 52 in the azathioprine group). In the full analysis set, median time to the first relapse was longer in the tocilizumab group than the azathioprine group (78·9 weeks [IQR 58·3–90·6] vs 56·7 [32·9–81·7] weeks; p=0·0026). Eight (14%) of 59 patients in the tocilizumab group and 28 (47%) of 59 patients in the azathioprine group had a relapse at the end of the study (hazard ratio [HR] 0·236 [95% CI 0·107–0·518]; p<0·0001). In the per-protocol analysis, 50 (89%) of 56 patients in the tocilizumab group were relapse-free compared with 29 (56%) of 52 patients in the azathioprine group at the end of the study (HR 0·188 [95% CI 0·076–0·463]; p<0·0001); the median time to first relapse was also longer in the tocilizumab group than the azathioprine group (67·2 weeks [IQR 47·9–77·9] vs 38·0 [23·6–64·9]; p<0·0001). In the prespecified subgroup analysis of the full analysis set stratified by concomitant autoimmune diseases, among patients without concomitant autoimmune diseases, three (9%) of 34 patients in the tocilizumab group and 13 (35%) of 37 patients in the azathioprine group had relapsed by the end of the study. Among patients with concomitant autoimmune diseases, a lower proportion of patients in the tocilizumab group had a relapse than in the azathioprine group (five [20%] of 25 patients vs 15 [68%] of 22 patients; HR 0·192 [95% CI 0·070–0·531]; p=0·0004). 57 (97%) of 59 patients in the tocilizumab group and 56 (95%) of 59 patients in the azathioprine group had adverse events. Treatment-associated adverse events occurred in 36 (61%) of 59 tocilizumab-treated patients and 49 (83%) of 59 azathioprine-treated patients. One death (2%) occurred in the tocilizumab group and one (2%) in the azathioprine group, but neither of the deaths were treatment-related. Tocilizumab significantly reduced the risk of a subsequent NMOSD relapse compared with azathioprine. Tocilizumab might therefore be another safe and effective treatment to prevent relapses in patients with NMOSD. Tianjin Medical University, Advanced Innovation Center for Human Brain Protection, National Key Research and Development Program of China, National Science Foundation of China.

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.

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.

ObjectiveFollowing induction of remission with rituximab in anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV) relapse rates are high, especially in patients with history of relapse. Relapses are associated with increased exposure to immunosuppressive medications, the accrual of damage and increased morbidity and mortality. The RITAZAREM trial compared the efficacy of repeat-dose rituximab to daily oral azathioprine for prevention of relapse in patients with relapsing AAV in whom remission was reinduced with rituximab.MethodsRITAZAREM was an international randomised controlled, open-label, superiority trial that recruited 188 patients at the time of an AAV relapse from 29 centres in seven countries between April 2013 and November 2016. All patients received rituximab and glucocorticoids to reinduce remission. Patients achieving remission by 4 months were randomised to receive rituximab intravenously (1000 mg every 4 months, through month 20) (85 patients) or azathioprine (2 mg/kg/day, tapered after month 24) (85 patients) and followed for a minimum of 36 months. The primary outcome was time to disease relapse (either major or minor relapse).ResultsRituximab was superior to azathioprine in preventing relapse: HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.27 to 0.61, p<0.001. 19/85 (22%) patients in the rituximab group and 31/85 (36%) in the azathioprine group experienced at least one serious adverse event during the treatment period. There were no differences in rates of hypogammaglobulinaemia or infection between groups.ConclusionsFollowing induction of remission with rituximab, fixed-interval, repeat-dose rituximab was superior to azathioprine for preventing disease relapse in patients with AAV with a prior history of relapse.Trial registration number NCT01697267; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

Biomarkers of intestinal inflammation, such as faecal calprotectin and C-reactive protein, have been recommended for monitoring patients with Crohn's disease, but whether their use in treatment decisions improves outcomes is unknown. We aimed to compare endoscopic and clinical outcomes in patients with moderate to severe Crohn's disease who were managed with a tight control algorithm, using clinical symptoms and biomarkers, versus patients managed with a clinical management algorithm. CALM was an open-label, randomised, controlled phase 3 study, done in 22 countries at 74 hospitals and outpatient centres, which evaluated adult patients (aged 18–75 years) with active endoscopic Crohn's disease (Crohn's Disease Endoscopic Index of Severity [CDEIS] >6; sum of CDEIS subscores of >6 in one or more segments with ulcers), a Crohn's Disease Activity Index (CDAI) of 150–450 depending on dose of prednisone at baseline, and no previous use of immunomodulators or biologics. Patients were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to tight control or clinical management groups, stratified by smoking status (yes or no), weight (<70 kg or ≥70 kg), and disease duration (≤2 years or >2 years) after 8 weeks of prednisone induction therapy, or earlier if they had active disease. In both groups, treatment was escalated in a stepwise manner, from no treatment, to adalimumab induction followed by adalimumab every other week, adalimumab every week, and lastly to both weekly adalimumab and daily azathioprine. This escalation was based on meeting treatment failure criteria, which differed between groups (tight control group before and after random assignment: faecal calprotectin ≥250 μg/g, C-reactive protein ≥5mg/L, CDAI ≥150, or prednisone use in the previous week; clinical management group before random assignment: CDAI decrease of <70 points compared with baseline or CDAI >200; clinical management group after random assignment: CDAI decrease of <100 points compared with baseline or CDAI ≥200, or prednisone use in the previous week). De-escalation was possible for patients receiving weekly adalimumab and azathioprine or weekly adalimumab alone if failure criteria were not met. The primary endpoint was mucosal healing (CDEIS <4) with absence of deep ulcers 48 weeks after randomisation. Primary and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This trial has been completed, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01235689. Between Feb 11, 2011, and Nov 3, 2016, 244 patients (mean disease duration: clinical management group, 0·9 years [SD 1·7]; tight control group, 1·0 year [2·3]) were randomly assigned to monitoring groups (n=122 per group). 29 (24%) patients in the clinical management group and 32 (26%) patients in the tight control group discontinued the study, mostly because of adverse events. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the tight control group achieved the primary endpoint at week 48 (56 [46%] of 122 patients) than in the clinical management group (37 [30%] of 122 patients), with a Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test-adjusted risk difference of 16·1% (95% CI 3·9–28·3; p=0·010). 105 (86%) of 122 patients in the tight control group and 100 (82%) of 122 patients in the clinical management group reported treatment-emergent adverse events; no treatment-related deaths occurred. The most common adverse events were nausea (21 [17%] of 122 patients), nasopharyngitis (18 [15%]), and headache (18 [15%]) in the tight control group, and worsening Crohn's disease (35 [29%] of 122 patients), arthralgia (19 [16%]), and nasopharyngitis (18 [15%]) in the clinical management group. CALM is the first study to show that timely escalation with an anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy on the basis of clinical symptoms combined with biomarkers in patients with early Crohn's disease results in better clinical and endoscopic outcomes than symptom-driven decisions alone. Future studies should assess the effects of such a strategy on long-term outcomes such as bowel damage, surgeries, hospital admissions, and disability. AbbVie.

ObjectiveIn newly diagnosed paediatric patients with moderate-to-severe Crohn’s disease (CD), infliximab (IFX) is initiated once exclusive enteral nutrition (EEN), corticosteroid and immunomodulator therapies have failed. We aimed to investigate whether starting first-line IFX (FL-IFX) is more effective to achieve and maintain remission than conventional treatment.DesignIn this multicentre open-label randomised controlled trial, untreated patients with a new diagnosis of CD (3–17 years old, weighted Paediatric CD Activity Index score (wPCDAI) >40) were assigned to groups that received five infusions of 5 mg/kg IFX at weeks 0, 2, 6, 14 and 22 (FL-IFX), or EEN or oral prednisolone (1 mg/kg, maximum 40 mg) (conventional). The primary outcome was clinical remission on azathioprine, defined as a wPCDAI <12.5 at week 52, without need for treatment escalation, using intention-to-treat analysis.Results100 patients were included, 50 in the FL-IFX group and 50 in the conventional group. Four patients did not receive treatment as per protocol. At week 10, a higher proportion of patients in the FL-IFX group than in the conventional group achieved clinical (59% vs 34%, respectively, p=0.021) and endoscopic remission (59% vs 17%, respectively, p=0.001). At week 52, the proportion of patients in clinical remission was not significantly different (p=0.421). However, 19/46 (41%) patients in the FL-IFX group were in clinical remission on azathioprine monotherapy without need for treatment escalation vs 7/48 (15%) in the conventional group (p=0.004).ConclusionsFL-IFX was superior to conventional treatment in achieving short-term clinical and endoscopic remission, and had greater likelihood of maintaining clinical remission at week 52 on azathioprine monotherapy.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT02517684).

In this randomized trial, patients with vasculitides who were in complete remission after initial induction therapy received either rituximab at intervals or daily azathioprine. More patients had sustained remission with rituximab than with azathioprine. Granulomatosis with polyangiitis (formerly called Wegener’s granulomatosis), microscopic polyangiitis, and renal-limited antineutrophil cytoplasm antibody (ANCA)–associated vasculitides are the main ANCA-associated vasculitis variants. 1 Although these entities differ in their pathogenesis, genetics, and serotypes, severe forms of ANCA-associated vasculitis share several clinical features and currently have similar treatments. 2 – 6 A staged therapeutic strategy that combines glucocorticoids and cyclophosphamide to induce remission has dramatically improved survival over the past few decades, but with frequent early and late side effects. The results of two trials (RAVE and RITUXVAS) showed that rituximab was not inferior to daily oral or pulse intravenous cyclophosphamide for the induction . . .

This study of ANCA-associated vasculitis compared a single course of rituximab with conventional immunosuppression with cyclophosphamide followed by azathioprine and showed similar results for the primary outcome of complete remission by 6 months, maintained through 18 months. Granulomatosis with polyangiitis (previously termed Wegener's granulomatosis) and microscopic polyangiitis are called antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)–associated vasculitides because they are frequently accompanied by autoantibodies against proteinase 3 or myeloperoxidase. 1 , 2 For nearly four decades, cyclophosphamide and glucocorticoids have been the standard therapy for the induction of remission. However, the primary results of the Rituximab in ANCA-Associated Vasculitis (RAVE) trial 3 and results from a European trial 4 showed that rituximab was as effective as cyclophosphamide for the induction of remission in patients with severe disease. Moreover, the rituximab-based regimen was superior in patients who had relapsing disease at 6 months. 3 Rituximab has . . .