Muscle Disease Unit, Laboratory of Muscle Stem Cells and Gene Regulation, National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 9000 Rockville Pike 50 South Drive Building 50, Room 1142, 20892, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Division of Rheumatology, Children's National Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Pediatr Rheumatol Online J. 2023 Jan 6;21(1):3. doi: 10.1186/s12969-022-00785-5.
Despite new and better treatments for juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM), not all patients with moderate severity disease respond adequately to first-line therapy. Those with refractory disease remain at higher risk for disease and glucocorticoid-related complications. Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have become part of the arsenal of treatments for JDM. However, prospective comparative studies of commonly used biologics are lacking.
The Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) JDM biologics workgroup met in 2019 and produced a survey assessing current treatment escalation practices for JDM, including preferences regarding use of biologic treatments. The cases and questions were developed using a consensus framework, requiring 80% agreement for consensus. The survey was completed online in 2020 by CARRA members interested in JDM. Survey results were analyzed among all respondents and according to years of experience. Chi-square or Fisher's exact test was used to compare the distribution of responses to each survey question.
One hundred twenty-one CARRA members responded to the survey (denominators vary for each question). Of the respondents, 88% were pediatric rheumatologists, 85% practiced in the United States, and 43% had over 10 years of experience. For a patient with moderately severe JDM refractory to methotrexate, glucocorticoids, and IVIG, approximately 80% of respondents indicated that they would initiate a biologic after failing 1-2 non-biologic DMARDs. Trials of methotrexate and mycophenolate were considered necessary by 96% and 60% of respondents, respectively, before initiating a biologic. By weighed average, rituximab was the preferred biologic over abatacept, tocilizumab, and infliximab. Over 50% of respondents would start a biologic by 4 months from diagnosis for patients with refractory moderately severe JDM. There were no notable differences in treatment practices between respondents by years of experience.
Most respondents favored starting a biologic earlier in disease course after trialing up to two conventional DMARDs, specifically including methotrexate. There was a clear preference for rituximab. However, there remains a dearth of prospective data comparing biologics in refractory JDM. These findings underscore the need for biologic consensus treatment plans (CTPs) for refractory JDM, which will ultimately facilitate comparative effectiveness studies and inform treatment practices.
尽管针对青少年皮肌炎(JDM)有新的、更好的治疗方法,但并非所有中度疾病患者对一线治疗均有足够的反应。那些难治性疾病患者仍面临更高的疾病和糖皮质激素相关并发症风险。生物疾病修饰抗风湿药物(DMARDs)已成为 JDM 治疗方案的一部分。然而,目前缺乏对常用生物制剂的前瞻性比较研究。
儿童关节炎和风湿病研究联盟(CARRA)JDM 生物制剂工作组于 2019 年召开会议,制作了一份评估 JDM 现有治疗升级实践的调查,包括对生物治疗使用的偏好。使用共识框架制定病例和问题,需要 80%的共识达成一致。2020 年,对 JDM 感兴趣的 CARRA 成员在线完成了这项调查。对所有应答者进行了调查结果分析,并根据工作年限进行了分类。采用卡方检验或 Fisher 精确检验比较了每个调查问题的应答分布。
121 名 CARRA 成员对调查做出了回应(每个问题的分母不同)。应答者中,88%为儿科风湿病学家,85%在美国执业,43%的人有超过 10 年的工作经验。对于一名对甲氨蝶呤、糖皮质激素和 IVIG 治疗反应不佳的中度严重 JDM 患者,大约 80%的应答者表示,在尝试 1-2 种非生物 DMARD 后,他们将开始使用生物制剂。分别有 96%和 60%的应答者认为在开始生物制剂治疗之前,需要尝试甲氨蝶呤和霉酚酸酯。根据加权平均值,利妥昔单抗是比阿巴西普、托珠单抗和英夫利昔单抗更受欢迎的生物制剂。对于难治性中度严重 JDM 患者,超过 50%的应答者将在发病后 4 个月内开始使用生物制剂。根据工作年限,应答者在治疗实践中没有明显差异。
大多数应答者倾向于在尝试两种传统 DMARD 后,在疾病过程早期开始使用生物制剂,特别是包括甲氨蝶呤。利妥昔单抗有明显的偏好。然而,在难治性 JDM 中比较生物制剂的前瞻性数据仍然缺乏。这些发现强调了制定难治性 JDM 生物 CTP 的必要性,这将最终促进比较有效性研究并指导治疗实践。