Explore the vast range of titles available.

Patients with recurrent pericarditis were treated with the interleukin-1 trap rilonacept. Those who had a response were randomly assigned to receive continued rilonacept or placebo. Rilonacept led to a significantly lower risk of pericarditis recurrence than placebo.

Recurrent pericarditis (RP) occurs in 15% to 30% of patients following a first episode, despite standard treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, colchicine, and corticosteroids; many patients become dependent on corticosteroids. Rilonacept (KPL-914), an interleukin-1α and β inhibitor, is in development for the treatment of RP. RHAPSODY, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized-withdrawal (RW) pivotal Phase 3 trial (NCT03737110), enrolls patients 12 years or older presenting with at least a third pericarditis episode, pericarditis pain score ≥4 (11-point numeric rating scale [NRS]), and C-reactive protein ≥1 mg/dL at screening. After a subcutaneous loading dose (adults, 320 mg; children, 4.4 mg/kg), all patients receive blinded weekly subcutaneous rilonacept (adults, 160 mg; children, 2.2 mg/kg) during the run-in period. Patients must taper and discontinue concomitant pericarditis medications during the blinded run-in period and achieve clinical response (C-reactive protein ≤0.5 mg/dL and weekly average NRS ≤2.0 during the 7 days prior to and including the day of randomization) by end of the run-in (while on rilonacept monotherapy) to be randomized to either continued rilonacept or placebo in the RW period. Primary efficacy end point was time to adjudicated pericarditis recurrence during the RW period; secondary efficacy end points were proportion of patients maintaining clinical response, percentage of days with NRS ≤2, and percentage of patients with no-to-minimal pericarditis symptoms at week 16 of the RW period. Safety evaluations include adverse event monitoring, physical examinations, and laboratory tests. The RHAPSODY trial will evaluate the efficacy and safety of rilonacept in the treatment of RP to improve outcomes and patient health-related quality of life.

Colchicine is effective for the treatment of acute pericarditis and first recurrences. However, conclusive data are lacking for the efficacy and safety of colchicine for treatment of multiple recurrences of pericarditis. We did this multicentre, double-blind trial at four general hospitals in northern Italy. Adult patients with multiple recurrences of pericarditis (≥two) were randomly assigned (1:1) to placebo or colchicine (0·5 mg twice daily for 6 months for patients weighing more than 70 kg or 0·5 mg once daily for patients weighing 70 kg or less) in addition to conventional anti-inflammatory treatment with aspirin, ibuprofen, or indometacin. Permuted block randomisation (size four) was done with a central computer-based automated sequence. Patients and all investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was recurrent pericarditis in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00235079. 240 patients were enrolled and 120 were assigned to each group. The proportion of patients who had recurrent pericarditis was 26 (21·6%) of 120 in the colchicine group and 51 (42·5%) of 120 in the placebo group (relative risk 0·49; 95% CI 0·24–0·65; p=0·0009; number needed to treat 5). Adverse effects and discontinuation of study drug occurred in much the same proportions in each group. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal intolerance (nine patients in the colchicine group vs nine in the placebo group) and hepatotoxicity (three vs one). No serious adverse events were reported. Colchicine added to conventional anti-inflammatory treatment significantly reduced the rate of subsequent recurrences of pericarditis in patients with multiple recurrences. Taken together with results from other randomised controlled trials, these findings suggest that colchicine should be probably regarded as a first-line treatment for either acute or recurrent pericarditis in the absence of contraindications or specific indications. Azienda Sanitaria 3 of Torino (now ASLTO2).

In a randomized trial, patients with acute pericarditis were assigned to either colchicine or placebo in addition to conventional antiinflammatory therapy. Colchicine significantly reduced the incidence of incessant or recurrent pericarditis. Colchicine has been used for centuries to treat and prevent gouty attacks 1 and more recently has been recommended to treat and prevent serositis in patients with familial Mediterranean fever and recurrent pericarditis. 2 , 3 Preliminary data from nonrandomized trials have also supported the use of colchicine for the treatment and prevention of acute pericarditis. 4 In a single-center, open-label, randomized trial, called the Colchicine for Acute Pericarditis (COPE) study, the addition of colchicine to conventional therapy with either aspirin or glucocorticoids halved the recurrence rate after an initial attack of acute pericarditis. 5 Our study, called the Investigation on Colchicine for Acute Pericarditis . . .

ObjectivePolypharmacy management of recurrent pericarditis (RP) often involves long-term therapies, often with negative effects. Slow tapering of oral therapies is often required to avoid recurrence. A post hoc analysis of the phase III trial Rilonacept inHibition of interleukin-1 Alpha and beta for recurrent Pericarditis: a pivotal Symptomatology and Outcomes Study (RHAPSODY) evaluated investigator approaches to transitioning to IL-1 blockade monotherapy with rilonacept, which was hypothesised to allow accelerated withdrawal of common multidrug pericarditis regimens.MethodsRHAPSODY was a multicentre (Australia, Israel, Italy, USA), double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised-withdrawal trial in adults and adolescents with RP. Investigators initiated rilonacept at the labelled dose level and discontinued oral pericarditis therapies during the 12-week run-in; randomised patients received study drug as monotherapy. Time to rilonacept monotherapy was quantified in patients receiving multidrug regimens at baseline who achieved rilonacept monotherapy during run-in.ResultsIn 86 enrolled patients, mean time to rilonacept monotherapy was 7.9 weeks, with no recurrences. Of these, 64% (n=55) entered on multidrug regimens: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) plus colchicine (44% (24/55)), colchicine plus glucocorticoids (24% (13/55)), or NSAIDs, colchicine, plus glucocorticoids (33% (18/55)). Investigators transitioned patients receiving colchicine and glucocorticoids at baseline to rilonacept monotherapy without recurrence regardless of taper approach: sequential (n=14; median, 7.7 weeks) or concurrent (n=17; median, 8.0 weeks). Median time to rilonacept monotherapy was similar regardless of glucocorticoid dose and duration: ≤15 mg/day (n=21): 7.3 weeks; >15 mg/day (n=18): 8.0 weeks; long-term (≥28 days): 7.6 weeks.ConclusionsRapid discontinuation of oral RP therapies while transitioning to rilonacept monotherapy was feasible without triggering pericarditis recurrence.Trial registration numberNCT03737110.

In this trial, patients with tuberculous pericarditis were randomly assigned to prednisolone or placebo and to Mycobacterium indicus pranii or placebo. Neither therapy reduced the risk of the composite outcome of death, cardiac tamponade, or constrictive pericarditis. Tuberculous pericarditis is a common cause of pericardial effusion, cardiac tamponade, and constrictive pericarditis in sub-Saharan Africa and parts of Asia. 1 – 3 Patients with tuberculous pericarditis often have concomitant human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. 1 Despite antituberculosis therapy, pericardial drainage, or pericardiectomy, mortality and morbidity remain high. 4 Mortality is as high as 26% at 6 months but is even higher (approximately 40%) among persons with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. 5 The use of glucocorticoid therapy in patients with tuberculous pericarditis to attenuate the inflammatory response may improve outcomes and decrease the risk of death by reducing cardiac tamponade and pericardial constriction, 6 but . . .

To the Editor: Klein et al. (Jan. 7 issue) 1 report that recurrences of pericarditis after treatment with rilonacept occurred in 2 of 30 patients (7%), as compared with 23 of 31 patients (74%) who received placebo. This incidence of recurrence is far higher than the 15 to 30% reported in other studies, as cited by the authors. Although the number of patients in the trial is relatively small, this high incidence suggests that there might be something unusual about the population assessed. Do the authors have any explanation for this extraordinarily high incidence? To the Editor: The phase 3 trial . . .

Recurrent pericarditis affects 15–30% of patients after acute pericarditis. A large number of the patients with recurrent pericarditis can become corticosteroid dependent, leading to disease chronicity and drug dependence, with additional morbidity from long-term steroid use. Recent randomized trials indicate the efficacy of the interleukin-1 inhibitors anakinra and rilonacept in recurrent pericarditis, including colchicine-resistant and corticosteroid-dependent cases. In particular, rilonacept was assessed in the RHAPSODY clinical trial and found to be a potential treatment option that would decrease recurrent episodes, enabling patients to be weaned off steroids. Additionally, new data indicate that rilonacept should be considered as an option for patients with recurrent pericarditis, as add-on therapy to colchicine and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, in place of steroids. We review the current management options for recurrent pericarditis as well as rilonacept as a prospective new addition to our armamentarium.

Summary Introduction Tuberculous (TB) pericarditis carries significant mortality and morbidity rates, not only during the primary infection, but also as part of the granulomatous scar-forming fibrocalcific constrictive pericarditis so commonly associated with this disease. Numerous therapies have previously been investigated as adjuvant strategies in the prevention of pericardial constriction. Colchicine is well described in the treatment of various aetiologies of pericarditis. The aim of this research was to investigate the merit for the use of colchicine in the management of tuberculous pericarditis, specifically to prevent constrictive pericarditis. Methods This pilot study was designed as a prospective, double-blinded, randomised, control cohort study and was conducted at a secondary level hospital in the Northern Cape of South Africa between August 2013 and December 2015. Patients with a probable or definite diagnosis of TB pericarditis were included (n = 33). Study participants with pericardial effusions amenable to pericardiocentesis underwent aspiration until dryness. All patients were treated with standard TB treatment and corticosteroids in accordance with the South African Tuberculosis Treatment Guidelines. Patients were randomised to an intervention and control group using a webbased computer system that ensured assignment concealment. The intervention group received colchicine 1.0 mg per day for six weeks and the control group received a placebo for the same period. Patients were followed up with serial echocardiography for 16 weeks. The primary outcome assessed was the development of pericardial constriction. Upon completion of the research period, the blinding was unveiled and data were presented for statistical analysis. Results TB pericarditis was found exclusively in HIV-positive individuals. The incidence of pericardial constriction in our cohort was 23.8%. No demonstrable benefit with the use of colchicine was found in terms of prevention of pericardial constriction (p = 0.88, relative risk 1.07, 95% CI: 0.46–2.46). Interestingly, pericardiocentesis appeared to decrease the incidence of pericardial constriction. Conclusion Based on this research, the use of colchicine in TB pericarditis cannot be advised. Adjuvant therapy in the prevention of pericardial constriction is still being investigated and routine pericardiocentesis may prove to be beneficial in this regard.