基线中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比率高的患者对菲戈替尼治疗类风湿性关节炎的反应更好

IF 2.9 3区医学 Q2 RHEUMATOLOGY

Rheumatology and Therapy Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-10 DOI:10.1007/s40744-024-00695-w

Peter C Taylor, Bryan Downie, Ling Han, Rachael Hawtin, Angie Hertz, Robert J Moots, Tsutomu Takeuchi

{"title":"基线中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比率高的患者对菲戈替尼治疗类风湿性关节炎的反应更好","authors":"Peter C Taylor, Bryan Downie, Ling Han, Rachael Hawtin, Angie Hertz, Robert J Moots, Tsutomu Takeuchi","doi":"10.1007/s40744-024-00695-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: High baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been associated with positive responses to biologic tumor necrosis factor inhibition and negative responses to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) triple therapy. Datasets from three randomized clinical trials in patients with RA were used to test the hypothesis that baseline NLR is associated with improved clinical response to filgotinib in methotrexate (MTX)-naïve or MTX-experienced RA populations.Methods: Patients from FINCH 1 (inadequate response to MTX, MTX-IR; NCT02889796), FINCH 2 (inadequate response to biologic DMARDs; NCT02873936), and FINCH 3 (MTX-naïve; NCT02886728) were classified as baseline NLR-High or baseline NLR-Low based on a previously published cut point of 2.7. In total, 3365 patients were included across the three studies. Differences in clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were determined using linear-regression models.Results: Control-arm patients (placebo + MTX/placebo + csDMARD) classified as NLR-High exhibited worse continuous clinical and PRO responses at week 12 across clinical trials compared to NLR-Low patients. In contrast, NLR-High patients who received FIL 200 mg + MTX/csDMARD exhibited consistently better responses after 12 weeks compared to NLR-Low patients across clinical trials, clinical endpoints, and PROs. These trends were most prominent among the MTX-IR population.Conclusion: The 2.7 baseline NLR cut point could be used to enrich for patients most likely to benefit from the addition of filgotinib to background MTX/csDMARD. Use of baseline NLR as part of therapeutic decision-making would not require additional diagnostics and could contribute to improved outcomes for patients with RA.Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02889796; NCT02873936; NCT02886728.","PeriodicalId":21267,"journal":{"name":"Rheumatology and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1383-1392"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11422297/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patients with High Baseline Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Exhibit Better Response to Filgotinib as Treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis.\",\"authors\":\"Peter C Taylor, Bryan Downie, Ling Han, Rachael Hawtin, Angie Hertz, Robert J Moots, Tsutomu Takeuchi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40744-024-00695-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: High baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been associated with positive responses to biologic tumor necrosis factor inhibition and negative responses to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) triple therapy. Datasets from three randomized clinical trials in patients with RA were used to test the hypothesis that baseline NLR is associated with improved clinical response to filgotinib in methotrexate (MTX)-naïve or MTX-experienced RA populations.Methods: Patients from FINCH 1 (inadequate response to MTX, MTX-IR; NCT02889796), FINCH 2 (inadequate response to biologic DMARDs; NCT02873936), and FINCH 3 (MTX-naïve; NCT02886728) were classified as baseline NLR-High or baseline NLR-Low based on a previously published cut point of 2.7. In total, 3365 patients were included across the three studies. Differences in clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were determined using linear-regression models.Results: Control-arm patients (placebo + MTX/placebo + csDMARD) classified as NLR-High exhibited worse continuous clinical and PRO responses at week 12 across clinical trials compared to NLR-Low patients. In contrast, NLR-High patients who received FIL 200 mg + MTX/csDMARD exhibited consistently better responses after 12 weeks compared to NLR-Low patients across clinical trials, clinical endpoints, and PROs. These trends were most prominent among the MTX-IR population.Conclusion: The 2.7 baseline NLR cut point could be used to enrich for patients most likely to benefit from the addition of filgotinib to background MTX/csDMARD. Use of baseline NLR as part of therapeutic decision-making would not require additional diagnostics and could contribute to improved outcomes for patients with RA.Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02889796; NCT02873936; NCT02886728.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21267,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rheumatology and Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1383-1392\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11422297/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rheumatology and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40744-024-00695-w\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rheumatology and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40744-024-00695-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

导言：类风湿性关节炎（RA）患者基线中性粒细胞与淋巴细胞比值（NLR）高与生物肿瘤坏死因子抑制剂的阳性反应和传统合成改善病情抗风湿药物（csDMARD）三联疗法的阴性反应有关。我们使用了三项针对RA患者的随机临床试验数据集，以检验基线NLR与甲氨蝶呤（MTX）无效或有MTX经验的RA人群对非格替尼临床反应的改善有关这一假设：FINCH 1（对MTX反应不足，MTX-IR；NCT02889796）、FINCH 2（对生物DMARDs反应不足；NCT02873936）和FINCH 3（MTX-naïve；NCT02886728）的患者根据之前公布的切点2.7分为基线NLR-高或基线NLR-低。三项研究共纳入 3365 例患者。采用线性回归模型确定了临床结果和患者报告结果（PROs）的差异：结果：与NLR-Low患者相比，被归类为NLR-High的对照组患者（安慰剂+MTX/安慰剂+csDMARD）在各临床试验的第12周表现出更差的连续临床和PRO反应。相比之下，接受 FIL 200 mg + MTX/csDMARD 治疗的 NLR 高患者与 NLR 低患者相比，在各临床试验、临床终点和 PROs 中，12 周后的反应持续较好。这些趋势在MTX-IR人群中最为突出：结论：基线NLR为2.7的切点可用于筛选最有可能从在MTX/csDMARD基础上加用filgotinib中获益的患者。使用基线NLR作为治疗决策的一部分不需要额外的诊断，并有助于改善RA患者的预后：试验注册：Clinicaltrials.gov：NCT02889796；NCT02873936；NCT02886728。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

Patients with High Baseline Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Exhibit Better Response to Filgotinib as Treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis.

查看原文本刊更多论文

Patients with High Baseline Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Exhibit Better Response to Filgotinib as Treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Introduction: High baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has been associated with positive responses to biologic tumor necrosis factor inhibition and negative responses to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) triple therapy. Datasets from three randomized clinical trials in patients with RA were used to test the hypothesis that baseline NLR is associated with improved clinical response to filgotinib in methotrexate (MTX)-naïve or MTX-experienced RA populations.

Methods: Patients from FINCH 1 (inadequate response to MTX, MTX-IR; NCT02889796), FINCH 2 (inadequate response to biologic DMARDs; NCT02873936), and FINCH 3 (MTX-naïve; NCT02886728) were classified as baseline NLR-High or baseline NLR-Low based on a previously published cut point of 2.7. In total, 3365 patients were included across the three studies. Differences in clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were determined using linear-regression models.

Results: Control-arm patients (placebo + MTX/placebo + csDMARD) classified as NLR-High exhibited worse continuous clinical and PRO responses at week 12 across clinical trials compared to NLR-Low patients. In contrast, NLR-High patients who received FIL 200 mg + MTX/csDMARD exhibited consistently better responses after 12 weeks compared to NLR-Low patients across clinical trials, clinical endpoints, and PROs. These trends were most prominent among the MTX-IR population.

Conclusion: The 2.7 baseline NLR cut point could be used to enrich for patients most likely to benefit from the addition of filgotinib to background MTX/csDMARD. Use of baseline NLR as part of therapeutic decision-making would not require additional diagnostics and could contribute to improved outcomes for patients with RA.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02889796; NCT02873936; NCT02886728.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Rheumatology and Therapy RHEUMATOLOGY-

CiteScore

6.00

自引率

5.30%

发文量

审稿时长

6 weeks

期刊介绍： Aims and Scope Rheumatology and Therapy is an international, open access, peer reviewed, rapid publication journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of rheumatologic therapies. Studies relating to diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also welcomed. Areas of focus include, but are not limited to, rheumatoid arthritis, gout, gouty arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, osteoarthritis, juvenile idiopathic/rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, axial spondyloarthritis, Pompe’s disease, inflammatory joint conditions, musculoskeletal conditions, systemic sclerosis, and fibromyalgia. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports, trial protocols, communications and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from all over the world. Rheumatology and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research. Ethics and Disclosures The journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and subscribes to its principles on how to deal with acts of misconduct thereby committing to investigate allegations of misconduct in order to ensure the integrity of research. Content in this journal is peer-reviewed (Single-blind). For more information on our publishing ethics policies, please see here: https://www.springer.com/gp/editorial-policies Rapid Publication The journal’s rapid publication timelines aim for a peer review decision within 2 weeks of submission. If an article is accepted it will be published online 3-4 weeks from acceptance. These rapid timelines are achieved through the combination of a dedicated in-house editorial team, who closely manage article workflow, and an extensive Editorial and Advisory Board who assist with rapid peer review. This allows the journal to support the rapid dissemination of research, whilst still providing robust peer review. Combined with the journal’s open access model this allows for the rapid and efficient communication of the latest research and reviews, allowing the advancement of rheumatologic therapies. Personal Service The journal’s dedicated in-house editorial team offer a personal “concierge service” meaning that authors will always have a personal point of contact able to update them on the status of their manuscript. The editorial team check all manuscripts to ensure that articles conform to the most recent COPE, GPP and ICMJE publishing guidelines. This supports the publication of ethically sound and transparent research. We also encourage pre-submission enquiries and are always happy to provide a confidential assessment of manuscripts. Digital Features Rheumatology and Therapy offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by key summary points, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article. The journal also provides the option to include various types of digital features including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations. All additional features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. If you consider that your paper would benefit from the inclusion of a digital feature, please let us know. Our editorial team are able to create high-quality slide decks and infographics in-house, and video abstracts through our partner Research Square, and would be happy to assist in any way we can. For further information about digital features, please contact the journal editor (see ‘Contact the Journal’ for email address), and see the ‘Guidelines for digital features and plain language summaries’ document under ‘Submission guidelines’. For examples of digital features please visit: https://springerhealthcare.com/expertise/publishing-digital-features/ Preprints We encourage posting of preprints of primary research manuscripts on preprint servers, authors'' or institutional websites, and open communications between researchers whether on community preprint servers or preprint commenting platforms. Posting of preprints is not considered prior publication and will not jeopardize consideration in our journals. Authors should disclose details of preprint posting during the submission process or at any other point during consideration in the journal. Once the manuscript is published, it is the author''s responsibility to ensure that the preprint record is updated with a publication reference, including the DOI and a URL link to the published version of the article on the journal website. Please see here for further information on preprint sharing: https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/journal-author/journal-author-helpdesk/submission/1302#c16721550 Peer Review Process Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the editorial team to ensure they fit within the aims and scope of the journal and are also checked for plagiarism. All suitable submissions are then subject to a comprehensive single-blind peer review. Reviewers are selected based on their relevant expertise and publication history in the subject area. The journal has an extensive pool of editorial and advisory board members who have been selected to assist with peer review based on the afore-mentioned criteria. At least two extensive reviews are required to make the editorial decision. Where reviewer recommendations are conflicted, the editorial board will be contacted for further advice and a presiding decision. Manuscripts are then either accepted, rejected or authors are required to make major or minor revisions (both reviewer comments and editorial comments may need to be addressed). Once a revised manuscript is re-submitted, it is assessed along with the responses to reviewer comments and if it has been adequately revised it will be accepted for publication. Accepted manuscripts are then copyedited and typeset by the production team before online publication. Appeals against decisions following peer review are considered on a case-by-case basis and should be sent to the journal editor, and authors are welcome to make rebuttals against individual reviewer comments if appropriate. Considering the time and effort required for a detailed peer review we reward our regular reviewers with the opportunity to publish without publication fees (pending peer review) for every three reviews completed per calendar year. Copyright Rheumatology and Therapy is published under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, which allows users to read, copy, distribute, and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited. The author assigns the exclusive right to any commercial use of the article to Springer. For more information about the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, click here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0. Publication Fees Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be required to pay the mandatory Rapid Service Fee of €5,250/$6,000/£4,300. The journal will consider fee discounts and waivers for developing countries and this is decided on a case-by-case basis. Open Access All articles published by Rheumatology and Therapy are published open access. Contact For more information about the journal, including pre-submission enquiries, please contact charlotte.maddocks@springernature.com.