To switch or to swap? Evidence from a meta-analysis for the best treatment approach in childhood chronic uveitis resistant to the I anti-TNF

IF 4.7 Q2 IMMUNOLOGY
Ilaria Maccora , Sara Soldovieri , Teodoro Oliverio , Salvatore de Masi , Edoardo Marrani , Ilaria Pagnini , Maria Vincenza Mastrolia , Gabriele Simonini
{"title":"To switch or to swap? Evidence from a meta-analysis for the best treatment approach in childhood chronic uveitis resistant to the I anti-TNF","authors":"Ilaria Maccora ,&nbsp;Sara Soldovieri ,&nbsp;Teodoro Oliverio ,&nbsp;Salvatore de Masi ,&nbsp;Edoardo Marrani ,&nbsp;Ilaria Pagnini ,&nbsp;Maria Vincenza Mastrolia ,&nbsp;Gabriele Simonini","doi":"10.1016/j.jtauto.2024.100247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Since adalimumab approval in childhood chronic non-infectious uveitis (cNIU), the prognosis has been dramatically changed, but the 25 % failed to achieve inactivity. There is not accordance if it is better to switch to another anti-TNF or to swap to another category of biologic. Thus, we aim to summarize evidence regarding the best treatment of cNIU refractory to the first anti-TNF.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A systematic literature review and meta-analysis, according to PRISMA Guidelines, was performed(Jan2000-Aug2023). Studies investigating the efficacy of treatment in cNIU refractory to the first anti-TNF were considered for inclusion. The primary outcome was the improvement of intraocular inflammation according to SUN. A combined estimation of the proportion of children responding to switch or swap and for each drug was performed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>23 articles were eligible, reporting 150 children of whom 109 switched anti-TNF (45 adalimumab, 49 infliximab, 9 golimumab) and 41 swapped to another biologics (31 abatacept, 8 tocilizumab and 1 rituximab). The proportion of responding children was 46 %(95 % CI 23-70) for switch and 38 %(95 % CI 8-73) for swap (χ<sup>2</sup>0.02, p = 0.86). Instead analysing for each drug, the proportion of responding children was the 24 %(95 % CI 2-55) for adalimumab, 43 %(95 % CI 2-80) for abatacept, 79 %(95 % CI 61-93) for infliximab, 56 %(95 % CI 14-95) for golimumab and 96 %(95 % CI 58-100) for tocilizumab. We evaluated a superiority of tocilizumab and infliximab compared to the other drugs(χ<sup>2</sup> 27.5 p &lt; 0.0001).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Although non-conclusive, this meta-analysis suggests that, after the first anti-TNF failure, tocilizumab and infliximab are the best available treatment for the management of cNIU.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36425,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Translational Autoimmunity","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100247"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589909024000170/pdfft?md5=0c91f958902d6a7d2c337e34d2d6fdd5&pid=1-s2.0-S2589909024000170-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Translational Autoimmunity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589909024000170","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Since adalimumab approval in childhood chronic non-infectious uveitis (cNIU), the prognosis has been dramatically changed, but the 25 % failed to achieve inactivity. There is not accordance if it is better to switch to another anti-TNF or to swap to another category of biologic. Thus, we aim to summarize evidence regarding the best treatment of cNIU refractory to the first anti-TNF.

Methods

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis, according to PRISMA Guidelines, was performed(Jan2000-Aug2023). Studies investigating the efficacy of treatment in cNIU refractory to the first anti-TNF were considered for inclusion. The primary outcome was the improvement of intraocular inflammation according to SUN. A combined estimation of the proportion of children responding to switch or swap and for each drug was performed.

Results

23 articles were eligible, reporting 150 children of whom 109 switched anti-TNF (45 adalimumab, 49 infliximab, 9 golimumab) and 41 swapped to another biologics (31 abatacept, 8 tocilizumab and 1 rituximab). The proportion of responding children was 46 %(95 % CI 23-70) for switch and 38 %(95 % CI 8-73) for swap (χ20.02, p = 0.86). Instead analysing for each drug, the proportion of responding children was the 24 %(95 % CI 2-55) for adalimumab, 43 %(95 % CI 2-80) for abatacept, 79 %(95 % CI 61-93) for infliximab, 56 %(95 % CI 14-95) for golimumab and 96 %(95 % CI 58-100) for tocilizumab. We evaluated a superiority of tocilizumab and infliximab compared to the other drugs(χ2 27.5 p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Although non-conclusive, this meta-analysis suggests that, after the first anti-TNF failure, tocilizumab and infliximab are the best available treatment for the management of cNIU.

换药还是换药?荟萃分析为对I型抗肿瘤坏死因子耐药的儿童慢性葡萄膜炎最佳治疗方法提供证据
目的自从阿达木单抗被批准用于儿童慢性非感染性葡萄膜炎(cNIU)以来,预后发生了巨大变化,但仍有25%的患者未能达到无效状态。目前尚不清楚是改用另一种抗肿瘤坏死因子(anti-TNF)更好,还是改用另一类生物制剂更好。因此,我们旨在总结有关对第一种抗肿瘤坏死因子(anti-TNF)治疗无效的 cNIU 的最佳治疗方法的证据。纳入考虑的研究对象是对首次抗肿瘤坏死因子治疗无效的 cNIU 进行疗效调查的研究。主要结果是眼内炎症的改善程度(根据 SUN 标准)。结果23篇文章符合条件,共报告了150名患儿,其中109名患儿换用了抗肿瘤坏死因子(45名阿达木单抗、49名英夫利昔单抗、9名戈利木单抗),41名患儿换用了其他生物制剂(31名阿帕他赛、8名托珠单抗和1名利妥昔单抗)。换药儿童的应答比例为 46%(95 % CI 23-70),换药儿童的应答比例为 38%(95 % CI 8-73)(χ20.02,P = 0.86)。如果对每种药物进行分析,阿达木单抗的应答儿童比例为 24%(95 % CI 2-55),阿帕他赛的应答儿童比例为 43%(95 % CI 2-80),英夫利西单抗的应答儿童比例为 79%(95 % CI 61-93),戈利木单抗的应答儿童比例为 56%(95 % CI 14-95),托珠单抗的应答儿童比例为 96%(95 % CI 58-100)。我们评估了托西珠单抗和英夫利昔单抗与其他药物相比的优越性(χ2 27.5 p < 0.0001)。结论尽管尚无定论,但这项荟萃分析表明,在首次抗肿瘤坏死因子治疗失败后,托西珠单抗和英夫利昔单抗是治疗 cNIU 的最佳药物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Translational Autoimmunity
Journal of Translational Autoimmunity Medicine-Immunology and Allergy
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
33
审稿时长
55 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信