Universitätspublikationen
Refine
Document Type
- Article (15)
Has Fulltext
- yes (15) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (15)
Keywords
- psoriatic arthritis (4)
- Lipidomics (2)
- Metabolomics (2)
- adalimumab (2)
- Ankylosierende Spondylitis (1)
- Ankylosing spondylitis (1)
- Anti-rheumatic agents (1)
- Axial spondyloarthritis (1)
- Axiale Spondyloarthritis (1)
- Biomarker Discovery Study (1)
Institute
Objective: Randomized trials have shown that concomitant methotrexate (MTX) augments the effectiveness of tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but its benefit in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has not been demonstrated. The goal of this study was to examine whether the impact of concomitant MTX on therapeutic outcomes in patients with PsA was similar to its effects in RA.
Methods: We used data from highly comparable and concurrent observational studies of patients with PsA (N = 1424) or RA (N = 3148) who initiated adalimumab therapy during routine clinical care. The 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) and patient-reported pain scores were evaluated in patients who received 24 months of continuous treatment with adalimumab monotherapy or adalimumab + MTX and in patients who initiated or stopped concomitant MTX during ongoing adalimumab therapy.
Results: Twenty-four months of continuous treatment with adalimumab + MTX was superior to adalimumab monotherapy in RA patients, while no significant difference was observed in patients with PsA. RA patients who added MTX during the study showed significant individual improvements in DAS28 and pain scores at 6 months after the change in therapy, while those who removed MTX had slight increases in disease activity. In contrast, in patients with PsA, neither initiation nor removal of MTX during continuous adalimumab therapy had a significant effect on therapeutic outcomes.
Conclusion: Addition of MTX to adalimumab confers further therapeutic benefit in patients with RA, but not in those with PsA, suggesting differences in MTX effects in these two patient populations.
Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01078090, NCT01077258, NCT01111240
Assessment of individual therapeutic responses provides valuable information concerning treatment benefits in individual patients. We evaluated individual therapeutic responses as determined by the Disease Activity Score-28 joints critical difference for improvement (DAS28-dcrit) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with intravenous tocilizumab or comparator anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents. The previously published DAS28-dcrit value [DAS28 decrease (improvement) ≥ 1.8] was retrospectively applied to data from two studies of tocilizumab in RA, the 52-week ACT-iON observational study and the 24-week ADACTA randomized study. Data were compared within (not between) studies. DAS28 was calculated with erythrocyte sedimentation rate as the inflammatory marker. Stability of DAS28-dcrit responses and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) good responses was determined by evaluating repeated responses at subsequent timepoints. A logistic regression model was used to calculate p values for differences in response rates between active agents. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs; pain, global health, function, and fatigue) in DAS28-dcrit responder versus non-responder groups were compared with an ANCOVA model. DAS28-dcrit individual response rates were 78.2% in tocilizumab-treated patients and 58.2% in anti-TNF-treated patients at week 52 in the ACT-ion study (p = 0.0001) and 90.1% versus 59.1% at week 24 in the ADACTA study (p < 0.0001). DAS28-dcrit responses showed greater stability over time (up to 52 weeks) than EULAR good responses. For both active treatments, DAS28-dcrit responses were associated with statistically significant improvements in mean PRO values compared with non-responders. The DAS28-dcrit response criterion provides robust assessments of individual responses to RA therapy and may be useful for discriminating between active agents in clinical studies and guiding treat-to-target decisions in daily practice.
The emerging disciplines of lipidomics and metabolomics show great potential for the discovery of diagnostic biomarkers, but appropriate pre-analytical sample-handling procedures are critical because several analytes are prone to ex vivo distortions during sample collection. To test how the intermediate storage temperature and storage period of plasma samples from K3EDTA whole-blood collection tubes affect analyte concentrations, we assessed samples from non-fasting healthy volunteers (n = 9) for a broad spectrum of metabolites, including lipids and lipid mediators, using a well-established LC-MS-based platform. We used a fold change-based approach as a relative measure of analyte stability to evaluate 489 analytes, employing a combination of targeted LC-MS/MS and LC-HRMS screening. The concentrations of many analytes were found to be reliable, often justifying less strict sample handling; however, certain analytes were unstable, supporting the need for meticulous processing. We make four data-driven recommendations for sample-handling protocols with varying degrees of stringency, based on the maximum number of analytes and the feasibility of routine clinical implementation. These protocols also enable the simple evaluation of biomarker candidates based on their analyte-specific vulnerability to ex vivo distortions. In summary, pre-analytical sample handling has a major effect on the suitability of certain metabolites as biomarkers, including several lipids and lipid mediators. Our sample-handling recommendations will increase the reliability and quality of samples when such metabolites are necessary for routine clinical diagnosis.
Small molecule biomarker discovery: Proposed workflow for LC-MS-based clinical research projects
(2023)
Mass spectrometry focusing on small endogenous molecules has become an integral part of biomarker discovery in the pursuit of an in-depth understanding of the pathophysiology of various diseases, ultimately enabling the application of personalized medicine. While LC-MS methods allow researchers to gather vast amounts of data from hundreds or thousands of samples, the successful execution of a study as part of clinical research also requires knowledge transfer with clinicians, involvement of data scientists, and interactions with various stakeholders.
The initial planning phase of a clinical research project involves specifying the scope and design, and engaging relevant experts from different fields. Enrolling subjects and designing trials rely largely on the overall objective of the study and epidemiological considerations, while proper pre-analytical sample handling has immediate implications on the quality of analytical data. Subsequent LC-MS measurements may be conducted in a targeted, semi-targeted, or non-targeted manner, resulting in datasets of varying size and accuracy. Data processing further enhances the quality of data and is a prerequisite for in-silico analysis. Nowadays, the evaluation of such complex datasets relies on a mix of classical statistics and machine learning applications, in combination with other tools, such as pathway analysis and gene set enrichment. Finally, results must be validated before biomarkers can be used as prognostic or diagnostic decision-making tools. Throughout the study, quality control measures should be employed to enhance the reliability of data and increase confidence in the results.
The aim of this graphical review is to provide an overview of the steps to be taken when conducting an LC-MS-based clinical research project to search for small molecule biomarkers.
Background: Secukinumab [an interleukin (IL)‐17A inhibitor] has demonstrated significantly higher efficacy vs. etanercept (a tumour necrosis factor inhibitor) and ustekinumab (an IL‐12/23 inhibitor) in patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis.
Objectives: To report 52‐week results from a prespecified analysis of patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) having concomitant moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis from the head‐to‐head EXCEED monotherapy study comparing secukinumab with adalimumab.
Methods: Patients were randomized to receive secukinumab 300 mg via subcutaneous injection at baseline, week 1–4, and then every 4 weeks until week 48 or adalimumab 40 mg via subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks from baseline until week 50. Assessments in patients with concomitant moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis, defined as having affected body surface area > 10% or Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) ≥ 10 at baseline, included musculoskeletal, skin and quality‐of‐life outcomes. Missing data were handled using multiple imputation.
Results: Of the 853 patients [secukinumab (N = 426), adalimumab (N = 427)], 211 (24·7%) had concomitant moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis [secukinumab (N = 110, 25·8%), adalimumab (N = 101, 23·7%)]. Up to week 50, 5·5% of patients discontinued secukinumab vs.17·8% in the adalimumab group. The proportion of patients who achieved American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 response was 76·4% with secukinumab vs. 68·3% with adalimumab (P = 0·175), PASI 100 response was 39·1% vs. 23·8% (P = 0·013), and simultaneous improvement in ACR 50 and PASI 100 response at week 52 was 28·2% vs. 17·7%, respectively (P = 0·06). Secukinumab demonstrated consistently higher responses vs. adalimumab across skin endpoints.
Conclusions: This prespecified analysis in PsA patients with concomitant moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis in the EXCEED study provides further evidence that IL‐17 inhibitors offer a comprehensive biological treatment to manage the concomitant features of psoriasis and PsA.
Implementing an automated monitoring process in a digital, longitudinal observational cohort study
(2021)
Background: Clinical data collection requires correct and complete data sets in order to perform correct statistical analysis and draw valid conclusions. While in randomized clinical trials much effort concentrates on data monitoring, this is rarely the case in observational studies- due to high numbers of cases and often-restricted resources. We have developed a valid and cost-effective monitoring tool, which can substantially contribute to an increased data quality in observational research.
Methods: An automated digital monitoring system for cohort studies developed by the German Rheumatism Research Centre (DRFZ) was tested within the disease register RABBIT-SpA, a longitudinal observational study including patients with axial spondyloarthritis and psoriatic arthritis. Physicians and patients complete electronic case report forms (eCRF) twice a year for up to 10 years. Automatic plausibility checks were implemented to verify all data after entry into the eCRF. To identify conflicts that cannot be found by this approach, all possible conflicts were compiled into a catalog. This “conflict catalog” was used to create queries, which are displayed as part of the eCRF. The proportion of queried eCRFs and responses were analyzed by descriptive methods. For the analysis of responses, the type of conflict was assigned to either a single conflict only (affecting individual items) or a conflict that required the entire eCRF to be queried.
Results: Data from 1883 patients was analyzed. A total of n = 3145 eCRFs submitted between baseline (T0) and T3 (12 months) had conflicts (40–64%). Fifty-six to 100% of the queries regarding eCRFs that were completely missing were answered. A mean of 1.4 to 2.4 single conflicts occurred per eCRF, of which 59–69% were answered. The most common missing values were CRP, ESR, Schober’s test, data on systemic glucocorticoid therapy, and presence of enthesitis.
Conclusion: Providing high data quality in large observational cohort studies is a major challenge, which requires careful monitoring. An automated monitoring process was successfully implemented and well accepted by the study centers. Two thirds of the queries were answered with new data. While conventional manual monitoring is resource-intensive and may itself create new sources of errors, automated processes are a convenient way to augment data quality.
Correction to: Clinical Rheumatology. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-021-05891-5
In the original published version of this article, the Figure 4 contained error. The line “ACR50 plus PASI100” has been presented incorrectly. The Figure 4 is now presented correctly. The original article has been corrected.
Qualitätsstandards (QS) sind messbare Konstrukte, die helfen sollen, Versorgungslücken quantitativ zu erfassen, um langfristig die Versorgungsqualität zu verbessern. Die Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) hat kürzlich erstmals internationale QS für das Management von Patient*innen mit axialer Spondyloarthritis (axSpA) konsentiert und veröffentlicht. Die Deutsche Gesellschaft für Rheumatologie (DGRh) hat daraufhin beschlossen, diese Standards durch eine Gruppe von Expert*innen aus unterschiedlichen Versorgungsbereichen zu übersetzen, zu prüfen und ggf. zu übernehmen. Vor diesem Hintergrund wurden erstmals nationale QS für das Management von Patient*innen mit axSpA für Deutschland entwickelt. Hierbei wurde v. a. auf Machbarkeit und Praxisrelevanz geachtet. Letztlich wurden 9 QS definiert, mit denen die Qualität der Versorgung in Deutschland gemessen und verbessert werden kann bzw. soll.
Introduction: Improvements in both musculoskeletal and non-musculoskeletal manifestations are important treatment goals in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Objective: These post hoc analyses determined whether additional benefits related to various PsA domains are observed in patients simultaneously achieving 50% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR50) and 100% improvement in Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI100), the primary endpoint of the SPIRIT-H2H study. Methods: Patients with active PsA and psoriasis in SPIRIT-H2H (N = 566) were categorised into two sets of four response groups irrespective of treatment allocation (approved dosages of ixekizumab or adalimumab): patients who simultaneously achieved ACR50 and PASI100 response, achieved ACR50 response only, achieved PASI100 response only, or did not achieve ACR50 or PASI100 response after 24 and 52 weeks of treatment. Patients achieving simultaneous ACR50 and PASI100 response were compared with the other patient response groups at the corresponding time point for efficacy and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes. Results: Patients simultaneously achieving ACR50 and PASI100 responses at week 24 or 52 showed higher rates of ACR70 response, minimal disease activity, Disease Activity in Psoriatic Arthritis ≤ 4, resolution of enthesitis and dactylitis, and HRQoL improvement at weeks 24 and 52, respectively, than the other corresponding response groups at both time points. Conclusion: High levels of disease control, such as those obtained with simultaneous achievement of ACR50 and PASI100 response, were linked to better outcomes across a wide range of endpoints that are important for patients with PsA. Patients meeting this combined endpoint showed more comprehensive and thus greater control of disease activity.