Deciphering differential biomarkers for anti-interleukin-6 receptor and anti-tumour necrosis factor-α treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis by multiomics analysis.
Inoncent Agueusop, Daniel Margerie, Anne Remaury, Raphaël Brard, Francesca Frau, Emilie Gerard, Gilbert Thill, Yaligara Veeranagouda, Michel Didier, Markus Kohlmann, Matthias Herrmann, Nadine Biesemann
{"title":"Deciphering differential biomarkers for anti-interleukin-6 receptor and anti-tumour necrosis factor-α treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis by multiomics analysis.","authors":"Inoncent Agueusop, Daniel Margerie, Anne Remaury, Raphaël Brard, Francesca Frau, Emilie Gerard, Gilbert Thill, Yaligara Veeranagouda, Michel Didier, Markus Kohlmann, Matthias Herrmann, Nadine Biesemann","doi":"10.1136/rmdopen-2025-005556","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify blood-based predictive and pharmacodynamic biomarkers at different timepoints in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with anti-interleukin-6 receptor (anti-IL-6R) and anti-tumour necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study used blood samples from the MONARCH trial (NCT02332590), a randomised, double-blind, phase III trial that compared the safety and efficacy of sarilumab (anti-IL-6R) and adalimumab (anti-TNF-α) monotherapy in patients with RA who were intolerant/inadequate responders to methotrexate. The study evaluated predictive biomarkers to anti-IL-6R and anti-TNF-α treatments at baseline and week 2 and pharmacodynamic biomarkers at week 2 and week 24 using Olink proteomics analysis (n=804 serum samples from 268 patients). Change in gene expression levels (n=522 peripheral blood samples from 261 patients) by both treatments was assessed using RNA sequencing analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Serum biomarkers most predictive to anti-IL-6R were different from those of anti-TNF-α; predictive biomarkers for anti-IL-6R were correlated with innate immune activation and synovial inflammation, while predictive biomarkers for anti-TNF-α seemed to be more T-cell and neutrophil-related. For baseline predictive biomarkers, we had to focus on relative prediction as the absolute prediction performance of single and combination biomarkers using cross-validation was limited. Additionally, the pharmacodynamic effects of anti-IL-6R and anti-TNF-α on biomarkers as well as pathway signatures were distinct.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The unbiased analysis of serum proteins identified biomarkers most predictive of anti-IL-6R and anti-TNF-α at different timepoints that could explain the difference in the response rate in patients with RA. Further, both biomarker and pathway results highlighted a differentiated mode of action of both treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":21396,"journal":{"name":"RMD Open","volume":"11 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12323545/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RMD Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2025-005556","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To identify blood-based predictive and pharmacodynamic biomarkers at different timepoints in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with anti-interleukin-6 receptor (anti-IL-6R) and anti-tumour necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α).
Methods: This study used blood samples from the MONARCH trial (NCT02332590), a randomised, double-blind, phase III trial that compared the safety and efficacy of sarilumab (anti-IL-6R) and adalimumab (anti-TNF-α) monotherapy in patients with RA who were intolerant/inadequate responders to methotrexate. The study evaluated predictive biomarkers to anti-IL-6R and anti-TNF-α treatments at baseline and week 2 and pharmacodynamic biomarkers at week 2 and week 24 using Olink proteomics analysis (n=804 serum samples from 268 patients). Change in gene expression levels (n=522 peripheral blood samples from 261 patients) by both treatments was assessed using RNA sequencing analysis.
Results: Serum biomarkers most predictive to anti-IL-6R were different from those of anti-TNF-α; predictive biomarkers for anti-IL-6R were correlated with innate immune activation and synovial inflammation, while predictive biomarkers for anti-TNF-α seemed to be more T-cell and neutrophil-related. For baseline predictive biomarkers, we had to focus on relative prediction as the absolute prediction performance of single and combination biomarkers using cross-validation was limited. Additionally, the pharmacodynamic effects of anti-IL-6R and anti-TNF-α on biomarkers as well as pathway signatures were distinct.
Conclusion: The unbiased analysis of serum proteins identified biomarkers most predictive of anti-IL-6R and anti-TNF-α at different timepoints that could explain the difference in the response rate in patients with RA. Further, both biomarker and pathway results highlighted a differentiated mode of action of both treatments.
期刊介绍：
RMD Open publishes high quality peer-reviewed original research covering the full spectrum of musculoskeletal disorders, rheumatism and connective tissue diseases, including osteoporosis, spine and rehabilitation. Clinical and epidemiological research, basic and translational medicine, interesting clinical cases, and smaller studies that add to the literature are all considered.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
