Dominguez-Casas Lucia C, Sánchez-Bilbao Lara, Calvo-Río Vanesa, Maíz Olga, Blanco Ana, Beltrán Emma, Martínez-Costa Lucía, Demetrío-Pablo Rosalía, Del Buergo María Álvarez, Rubio-Romero Esteban, Díaz-Valle David, Lopez-Gonzalez Ruth, García-Aparicio Ángel M, Mas Antonio J, Vegas-Revenga Nuria, Castañeda Santos, Hernández José L, González-Gay Miguel A, Blanco Ricardo
Rheumatology, Ophthalmology and Internal medicine, Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla, IDIVAL, Santander, Spain.
Rheumatology, Ophthalmology and Internal medicine, Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla, IDIVAL, Santander, Spain.
Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2020 Aug;50(4):608-615. doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2020.03.023. Epub 2020 May 15.
We assessed the efficacy and safety of biologic therapy in severe and refractory Peripheral Ulcerative Keratitis (PUK).
Open-label multicenter study of biologic-treated patients with severe PUK refractory to conventional immunosuppressive drugs.
We studied 34 patients (44 affected eyes) (24 women/10 men; mean age, 55.26±17.4 years). PUK was associated with a well-defined condition in 29 of them (rheumatoid arthritis [n = 20], psoriatic arthritis [n = 2], inflammatory bowel disease [n = 2], Behçet disease [n = 1], granulomatosis with polyangiitis [n = 1], microscopic polyangiitis [n = 1], systemic lupus erythematosus [n = 1] and axial spondyloarthritis [n = 1]). Besides topical and oral systemic glucocorticoids, patients had received: methylprednisolone pulses [n = 9], and conventional immunosuppressive drugs, mainly methotrexate [n = 18], and leflunomide [n = 7]. Eleven patients had required ocular surgery prior to biologic therapy.
Following biologic therapy, baseline main outcomes were compared with those found at 1st week, 1st and 6th months and 1st year.
Efficacy and safety of biologic therapy. Efficacy was analyzed by the assessment of corneal inflammation (corneal thinning, central keratolysis and ocular perforation); other causes of ocular surface inflammation (scleritis, episcleritis); intraocular inflammation (uveitis); visual acuity and glucocorticoid sparing effect.
The first biologic agents used were anti-TNFα drugs (n = 25); adalimumab (n = 16), infliximab (n = 8), etanercept (n = 1), and non-TNFα agents (n = 9); rituximab (n = 7), tocilizumab (n = 1) belimumab (n = 1) and abatacept (n = 1). During the follow-up, switching to a second biologic agent was required in 12 of the 25 (48%) patients treated with anti-TNFα drugs. However, no switching was required in those undergoing biologic therapy different from anti-TNFα agents. The main outcome variables showed a rapid and maintained improvement after a mean follow-up of 23.7 ± 20 months. Major adverse effects were tachyphylaxis, relapsing respiratory infections, supraventricular tachycardia, pulmonary tuberculosis and death, one each.
Biologic therapy is effective and relatively safe in patients with severe and refractory PUK. Non-anti-TNFα agents appear to be effective in these patients.
我们评估了生物疗法在重度难治性周边溃疡性角膜炎(PUK)中的疗效和安全性。
对接受生物治疗的重度PUK患者进行开放标签多中心研究,这些患者对传统免疫抑制药物难治。
我们研究了34例患者(44只患眼)(24名女性/10名男性;平均年龄55.26±17.4岁)。其中29例患者的PUK与明确的疾病相关(类风湿性关节炎[n = 20]、银屑病关节炎[n = 2]、炎症性肠病[n = 2]、白塞病[n = 1]、肉芽肿性多血管炎[n = 1]、显微镜下多血管炎[n = 1]、系统性红斑狼疮[n = 1]和轴性脊柱关节炎[n = 1])。除局部和口服全身糖皮质激素外,患者还接受过:甲泼尼龙冲击治疗[n = 9],以及传统免疫抑制药物,主要是甲氨蝶呤[n = 18]和来氟米特[n = 7]。11例患者在生物治疗前需要进行眼科手术。
生物治疗后,将基线主要结局与第1周、第1和6个月以及第1年时的结局进行比较。
生物疗法的疗效和安全性。通过评估角膜炎症(角膜变薄、中央角膜溶解和眼球穿孔)、眼表炎症的其他原因(巩膜炎、表层巩膜炎)、眼内炎症(葡萄膜炎)、视力和糖皮质激素节省效应来分析疗效。
首先使用的生物制剂是抗TNFα药物(n = 25);阿达木单抗(n = 16)、英夫利昔单抗(n = 8)、依那西普(n = 1),以及非TNFα药物(n = 9);利妥昔单抗(n = 7)、托珠单抗(n = 1)、贝利尤单抗(n = 1)和阿巴西普(n = 1)。在随访期间,25例接受抗TNFα药物治疗的患者中有12例(48%)需要换用第二种生物制剂。然而,接受非抗TNFα药物生物治疗的患者无需换药。平均随访23.7±20个月后,主要结局变量显示出快速且持续的改善。主要不良反应为快速耐受、复发性呼吸道感染、室上性心动过速、肺结核和死亡,各1例。
生物疗法对重度难治性PUK患者有效且相对安全。非抗TNFα药物在这些患者中似乎有效。