Manousou Sofia, Holmberg Mats, Ekdahl Elin, Malmgren Helge, Filipsson Nyström Helena
Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Department of Endocrine Research, Blå Stråket, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden; Wallenberg Centre for Molecular and Translational Medicine, Västra Götalands Region, Sweden; Department of Cardiology and Diabetes, Högsbo Hospital, Västra Frölunda, Sweden.
Wallenberg Centre for Molecular and Translational Medicine, Västra Götalands Region, Sweden; Department of Medicine, Huddinge, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; ANOVA, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Endocr Pract. 2025 Apr;31(4):447-454. doi: 10.1016/j.eprac.2024.12.007. Epub 2024 Dec 12.
In moderate-to-severe Graves' orbitopathy, rituximab is recommended as second-line therapy in patients nonresponsive to intravenous glucocorticoids. We aimed to evaluate rituximab as early second-line therapy, as data are scarce and contradictory.
In this nonrandomized, controlled, interventional study, patients with Graves' orbitopathy started on intravenous glucocorticoids. After 4 weeks, patients with < 2 points improvement in clinical activity score (CAS) were switched to rituximab [Non-Responders Rituximab (NR-RTX) group] and were compared to the remaining patients who continued with intravenous glucocorticoids for 12 weeks [Responders-Glucocorticoid (R-GC) group]. A retrospective group of non-responsive patients who were provided regular care with intravenous glucocorticoids for 12 weeks was used as control [Non-Responders-Regular Care group]. Background data and CAS were recorded for all groups at 0, 4, 12, 18, and 68 weeks. Quality of life (QoL) and safety data were collected from the NR-RTX and R-GC groups.
The NR-RTX group (n = 12) was similar to the others at baseline except for a 1-point lower median CAS compared to the NR-RC group (n = 12) (P = .03), and for having twice as many men compared to the R-GC group (n = 13) (P = .03). At 4 weeks, a linear mixed model indicated that the R-GC group had a 1.21-point (95% CI: -2.40 to -0.02) lower value for CAS compared to the NR-RTX group. CAS for all groups converged over time. Similar models for QoL revealed no treatment or time effects.
Switch to RTX early in the treatment course did not result in better CAS or QoL, compared to continuous intravenous glucocorticoids.
在中重度格雷夫斯眼眶病中,利妥昔单抗被推荐作为对静脉注射糖皮质激素无反应患者的二线治疗药物。由于相关数据稀缺且相互矛盾,我们旨在评估利妥昔单抗作为早期二线治疗的效果。
在这项非随机、对照、干预性研究中,格雷夫斯眼眶病患者开始接受静脉注射糖皮质激素治疗。4周后,临床活动评分(CAS)改善不足2分的患者转而使用利妥昔单抗(无反应者利妥昔单抗组),并与继续接受12周静脉注射糖皮质激素治疗的其余患者(反应者-糖皮质激素组)进行比较。一组回顾性的对静脉注射糖皮质激素进行常规治疗12周的无反应患者用作对照(无反应者-常规治疗组)。在第0、4、12、18和68周记录所有组的背景数据和CAS。从无反应者利妥昔单抗组和反应者-糖皮质激素组收集生活质量(QoL)和安全性数据。
无反应者利妥昔单抗组(n = 12)在基线时与其他组相似,只是与无反应者-常规治疗组(n = 12)相比,中位CAS低1分(P = 0.03),与反应者-糖皮质激素组(n = 13)相比,男性患者数量是其两倍(P = 0.03)。在4周时,线性混合模型表明,与无反应者利妥昔单抗组相比,反应者-糖皮质激素组的CAS值低1.21分(95% CI:-2.40至-0.02)。所有组的CAS随时间趋于一致。类似的QoL模型显示没有治疗或时间效应。
与持续静脉注射糖皮质激素相比,在治疗过程早期改用利妥昔单抗并未带来更好的CAS或QoL。