Oral tuberculosis associated with a treatment with anti-rheumatic drugs

BACKGROUND: The use of immunosuppressive medication is a dominant risk factor for infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methotrexate (MTX) is one of the traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Adalimumab [a human anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (anti-TNF-alpha) monoclonal antibody] represent an important advance in the treatment of RA and has been recently come in use. TNF-alpha plays a role in the host defense against Mycobacterium tuberculosis and notably in granuloma formation. Infections occur at a high rate among those who use one or the combination of the two medications. METHOD: We examined a female patient that was referred to our department for evaluation and treatment of a granular lesion on the soft palate and uvula, complaining of mild dysphagia. The patient was treated for 4 months with MTX and adalimumab for RA before the oral lesion appeared. RESULTS: The histopathological examination of a specimen of the oral lesion, taken by biopsy, showed a chronic inflammation characterized by tuberculous granulomas. Polymerase chain reaction test and culture of a new specimen was positive for M. tuberculosis. CONCLUSIONS: The therapeutic use of MTX or/and adalimumab for the treatment of RA or few others diseases, can cause oral tuberculosis.     

Anti-drug antibodies in psoriasis: a critical evaluation of clinical significance and impact on treatment response

TNF inhibitors and anti-p40IL12/23 monoclonal antibodies are efficacious treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. However, the formation of anti-drug antibodies (ADA) with biologics may prevent patients from achieving a full clinical response. ADA have been reported in patients treated with etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab or ustekinumab at rates of 0–18.3%, 5.4–43.6%, 8.8–44.8% and 3.8–5.4%, respectively. Antibodies against etanercept have no apparent effects on clinical response, whereas antibodies against infliximab or adalimumab have been associated with diminished clinical response. The significance of ADA against ustekinumab is yet to be determined. Data regarding management strategies to counteract ADA formation and their effects are limited in psoriasis patients. However, some evidence suggests that concomitant immunomodulators such as methotrexate may suppress ADA development in psoriasis. ADA specific to one biologic do not appear to carry cross-linking potential with other biologic agents. ADA formation needs to be considered as a possible factor contributing to diminished response from biologic agents.     

Efficacy of combined anti-TNF-alpha and surgical therapy in perianal and enterocutaneous fistulizing Crohn’s disease – clinical observations from a tertiary Eastern European center

Abstract

Background and aims. Recently, anti-TNF-alpha therapy has increasingly been used in the treatment of perianal Crohn’s disease (PCD), but there is only limited data regarding its short- and long-term efficacy. Material and methods. The medical records of 68 patients treated with anti-TNF-alpha for PCD were assessed retrospectively. Rate of complex fistulas was 75%. Every patient received induction therapy, but in 20 cases the treatment was discontinued before week 52 due to funding regulations, an allergic reaction, or compliance problems. On week 12, the luminal activity decreased in more than 80% of the cases and the complete remission (CR) rate was about 60%; by the end of the first year, this ratio did not change substantially. Complete fistula closure was achieved in 26 cases (38.3%) and 53 patients (51.5%) showed a partial response during the 1-year period. Regarding both perianal and luminal activities, CR rate was achieved in 23 cases (33.8%). However, after the biological therapy was discontinued, recurrence of fistulas could be detected in every second patient. Additional surgical intervention was performed in 45% of patients during the 1-year period (seton drainage of fistulas and abscess drainage). Conclusion. The anti-TNF-alpha therapy combined with surgery is an effective treatment of PCD. Approximately every third patient revealed complete fistula closure, while half of the other cases showed a partial response. Due to the high rate of fistula recurrence after stopping the biological therapy, more than 1 year of anti-TNF-α treatment may be beneficial.     

Toxic optic neuropathies: an updated review

Toxic optic neuropathy (TON) is caused by the damage to the optic nerve through different toxins, including drugs, metals, organic solvents, methanol and carbon dioxide. A similar clinical picture may also be caused by nutritional deficits, including B vitamins, folic acid and proteins with sulphur‐containing amino acids. This review summarizes the present knowledge on disease‐causing factors, clinical presentation, diagnostics and treatment in TON. It discusses in detail known and hypothesized relations between drugs, including tuberculostatic drugs, antimicrobial agents, antiepileptic drugs, antiarrhythmic drugs, disulfiram, halogenated hydroquinolones, antimetabolites, tamoxifen and phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors and optic neuropathy.     

Biologics in oral medicine: principles of use and practical considerations

Oral Diseases (2012) 18, 525-536 Biologic therapies are relatively innovative treatments aimed at modulating lymphocytes or cytokines. There are currently three broad classes of biologic therapies, tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors, lymphocyte modulators and interleukin inhibitors; all are increasingly used in the treatment of inflammatory immune-mediated conditions, and several have potential applications in oral medicine. Guidelines for their use in licensed indications (e.g. rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, inflammatory bowel disease) include recommendations and guidance for patient selection and subsequent monitoring with discussion of potential adverse effects. An understanding of these is important when managing patients receiving biologic therapy for systemic disease, and compliance is essential in any use in oral medicine. Key aspects of current guidance are presented with particular emphasis on their relevance to clinicians working within oral and maxillofacial medicine/pathology/surgery and in specialist practice.     

Plasma trough levels of adalimumab and infliximab in terms of clinical efficacy during the treatment of psoriasis

We examined the relation between adalimumab and infliximab plasma trough levels, anti‐adalimumab and anti‐infliximab antibody formation. We analyzed plasma from 32 adalimumab‐treated and 20 infliximab‐treated psoriasis patients for evaluating trough levels of each drug. The presence of anti‐adalimumab and anti‐infliximab antibodies was analyzed and the severity of psoriasis was evaluated. At week 28, 25 out of 32 and at week 48, 21 out of 30 adalimumab‐treated patients maintained as more than PASI 75. At week 28, 12 out of 20 and at week 48, nine out of 18 infliximab‐treated patients were evaluated as more than PASI 75. In patients treated with 40 mg adalimumab every other week, the mean trough level was 7.62 μg/mL (range, 0.05–10.6) at week 48. In patients treated with 80 mg adalimumab every other week, the mean trough level was 8.61 μg/mL (range, 0.08–13.5) at week 48. Mean trough level of infliximab‐treated cases (4.1–5.2 mg/kg; mean, 4.6) was 4.64 μg/mL (range, 0.03–16.9) at week 48. Anti‐adalimumab antibody was detected in five out of 32 cases and anti‐infliximab antibody was detected in six out of 20 cases, respectively, at weeks 24 and 48. The optimal cut‐off values of adalimumab and infliximab concentration for more than PASI 75 were more than 7.84 μg/mL and more than 0.92 μg/mL, respectively. The trough levels of adalimumab and infliximab in psoriasis patients were positively associated with clinical response and were significantly lower in cases having anti‐adalimumab or anti‐infliximab antibodies.     

Use of biological drugs in patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis in Italy: Results from the PSONG survey

This Italian multicenter retrospective study compared the drug survival and efficacy of different anti‐TNF agents in psoriasis (PsO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients. A database of PsO/PsA patients treated with adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab from May 2013 to May 2014 was analyzed. PASI 75, 90, and 100 was calculated at each time point to evaluate efficacy. Drug survival rate and probability of maintaining PASI response were evaluated. The impact of dependent variables on probability of PASI 75 loss was evaluated by logistic regression. 1,235 patients were included, 577 with PsO and 658 with PsA. Highest survival rates were observed with adalimumab followed by etanercept and infliximab in PsO and PsA patients. The probability of maintaining PASI response was significantly higher for adalimumab followed by infliximab. For PsO patients, the odds of losing PASI 75 was higher in etanercept‐treated patients (OR: 8.1; 95% CI: 4.2–15.6, p < .001) or infliximab (OR: 6.6; 95% CI: 2.6–16.3, p < .001) vs. adalimumab. Likewise, for PsA patients the odds of losing PASI 75 was higher in etanercept‐treated patients (OR: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.4–3.8, p = .01) or infliximab (OR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.1–4.1, p = .018) vs. adalimumab. Adalimumab could be the best therapeutic option over other anti‐TNF agents for the treatment of PsO and PsA patients.     

Adalimumab: a review of side effects

Adalimumab (Humira^®) is a human monoclonal TNF-α antibody that blocks the effects of TNF-α. It is administered by subcutaneous injection. It has been approved alone or in combination with methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in the EU and US. Approval for its use for the treatment of psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis is expected in the near future. Its side effect profile is favourable when compared with traditional systemic treatments for these diseases. It does not require laboratory monitoring. The most common side effects of adalimumab are injection site reactions. Adalimumab increases the risk of rare serious infections. There is a two-fold risk of serious infections with the use of adalimumab, as reported in the Premier trial. This risk should not be minimised in this way. It should not be used during periods of active infection. Its most notable infectious complication is the reactivation of tuberculosis. Tuberculosis screening should be according to country standards and may or may not include purified protein derivative test or chest X-ray. Deep fungal and other serious and atypical infection can also be promoted by adalimumab. It has been associated infrequently with skin rashes. Rare side effects include: worsening or initiation of congestive heart failure, a lupus-like syndrome, a promotion of lymphoma, medically significant cytopenias, and worsening or initiation of a multiple sclerosis/neurological disease. There has been reported pancytopenia and elevated transamines with the use of adalimumab, which suggest that laboratory monitoring blood counts and liver functions, at least intermittently, are useful. In patients with any of the foregoing problems, its use should be extremely carefully considered. Adalimumab is a useful medication which can be safely used if its side effects are recognised.     

The Use of Biologic Agents in the Treatment of Ocular Manifestations of Behcet’s Disease

Behçet’s Disease (BD) is a multisystem inflammatory disorder of uncertain etiology with a variety of potential manifestations throughout the body, and its ocular complications are some of its most devastating. Treatment with immunosuppressive agents has improved outcomes, but many patients suffer from disease that responds poorly to conventional therapies. Because of this, therapy with a variety of biological response modifiers has been employed. The earliest was interferon-α, and a multitude of reports have described its benefits for the uveitis associated with Behçet’s Disease. Many patients enjoy durable remissions of their ocular inflammatory disease even after discontinuation of therapy, but side-effects are almost universal and some can be dangerous. Of the newer biological response modifiers, infliximab, a monoclonal antibody to TNF-α, has been most extensively studied. It is reported to be rapidly effective in many cases of Behçet’s Disease uveitis, though with conflicting data as to the ability to induce durable remission after cessation of treatment. Side-effects are relatively rare, but may be serious. Several reports have been published on the use of other biologic agents, including adalimumab (a humanized antibody to TNF-α), etanercept (a molecule that resembles the TNF-α receptor), and rituximab (an antibody to CD20 that depletes the body of CD20-positive B cells). Of the three of these, adalimumab has the most promising initial evidence, etanercept has very few positive reports in patients with BD uveitis (and is likely ineffective in uveitis in general), and rituximab is lacking data. Although randomized controlled trials are almost completely lacking, currently available evidence is promising that biologic agents can prove an invaluable addition to the armamentarium of the practitioner treating patients with BD uveitis.