Search

Blood dendritic cell antigen 2 (BDCA2) is a receptor that is exclusively expressed on plasmacytoid dendritic cells, which are implicated in the pathogenesis of lupus erythematosus. Whether treatment with litifilimab, a humanized monoclonal antibody against BDCA2, would be efficacious in reducing disease activity in patients with cutaneous lupus erythematosus has not been extensively studied.In this phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned adults with histologically confirmed cutaneous lupus erythematosus with or without systemic manifestations in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous litifilimab (at a dose of 50, 150, or 450 mg) or placebo at weeks 0, 2, 4, 8, and 12. We used a dose-response model to assess whether there was a response across the four groups on the basis of the primary end point, which was the percent change from baseline to 16 weeks in the Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index-Activity score (CLASI-A; scores range from 0 to 70, with higher scores indicating more widespread or severe skin involvement). Safety was also assessed.A total of 132 participants were enrolled; 26 were assigned to the 50-mg litifilimab group, 25 to the 150-mg litifilimab group, 48 to the 450-mg litifilimab group, and 33 to the placebo group. Mean CLASI-A scores for the groups at baseline were 15.2, 18.4, 16.5, and 16.5, respectively. The difference from placebo in the change from baseline in CLASI-A score at week 16 was -24.3 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI] -43.7 to -4.9) in the 50-mg litifilimab group, -33.4 percentage points (95% CI, -52.7 to -14.1) in the 150-mg group, and -28.0 percentage points (95% CI, -44.6 to -11.4) in the 450-mg group. The least squares mean changes were used in the primary analysis of a best-fitting dose-response model across the three drug-dose levels and placebo, which showed a significant effect. Most of the secondary end points did not support the results of the primary analysis. Litifilimab was associated with three cases each of hypersensitivity and oral herpes infection and one case of herpes zoster infection. One case of herpes zoster meningitis occurred 4 months after the participant received the last dose of litifilimab.In a phase 2 trial involving participants with cutaneous lupus erythematosus, treatment with litifilimab was superior to placebo with regard to a measure of skin disease activity over a period of 16 weeks. Larger and longer trials are needed to determine the effect and safety of litifilimab for the treatment of cutaneous lupus erythematosus. (Funded by Biogen; LILAC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02847598.).

Recently, more emphasis has been placed on patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials, which has inadvertently led to an increase in respondent burden. In this investigation, we found that the Skindex-16 form captures patient-reported quality of life in dermatomyositis as well as the Skindex-29 form, but with fewer questions. Additional questions regarding photosensitivity, body image, and cosmetic use did not correlate with skin activity in dermatomyositis.

BP is a rare autoimmune skin-blistering disorder with a profound negative impact on quality of life, associated with burdensome morbidity and possible mortality. There is a need for effective targeted therapies with a demonstrated safety profile for BP. Dupilumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13, key and central drivers of type 2 inflammation that may play a role in BP. Published case series describes the use of dupilumab in patients with BP, but it has not been formally assessed in a clinical trial for BP. We describe the design of the LIBERTY-BP ADEPT trial (NCT04206553) that aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of dupilumab in achieving sustained remission off oral corticosteroids (OCS) in patients with moderate-to-severe BP. LIBERTY-BP ADEPT is a global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study consisting of a 35-day screening period, a 52-week double-blind treatment period and a 12-week follow-up period. Inclusion criteria include age 18–90 years and clinical features of BP with a confirmed diagnosis based on histopathology, immunopathology, and serology. Exclusion criteria include previous treatment with IL-4 or IL-13 antagonists or systemic or medium-to-high potency topical corticosteroids within 7 days of the baseline visit. All patients receive standard OCS to control disease activity at the start of the treatment period. Post randomization, after 2 weeks of sustained remission, OCS is to be gradually tapered and discontinued as long as disease control is maintained. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients achieving sustained remission at week 36. Key secondary endpoints include total cumulative OCS dose, percent change in weekly average daily Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score, and proportion of patients with improved daily Peak Pruritus NRS score ≥4 from baseline to week 36. LIBERTY-BP ADEPT aims to enroll 98 patients; enrollment is ongoing and will include more than 17 sites in Europe. BP shares pathophysiological pathways with type 2 inflammatory diseases mediated by IL-4 and IL-13. The ongoing LIBERTY-BP ADEPT study is the first randomized, controlled trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dupilumab in patients with moderate-to-severe BP.

There have been a number of advances in the clinical and translational understanding of cutaneous lupus and dermatomyositis, which both disproportionately affect women. These advances have involved ongoing collaborations between dermatology and rheumatology that highlight the importance of the skin in these disorders, with improvement in the education of trainees and clinical management of these complex multisystem diseases. In addition, a new disease classification has allowed inclusion of patients with skin-predominant dermatomyositis, frequently associated with systemic findings, in the spectrum of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. Validated outcome measures allow translational research and facilitate progress toward better and more targeted therapeutics. Clinical trials using disease severity tools, such as the Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Area and Severity Index and the Cutaneous Dermatomyositis Disease Area and Severity Index, allow measurement of improvement in the skin. Recent results of phase 2 and 3 trials clearly show that patients will benefit from collaborative interactions and studies between dermatology and rheumatology.

For patients with lupus erythematosus (LE) or dermatomyositis (DM), there is an urgent need to address a heightened risk of clinical events, chiefly heart attacks and strokes, caused by atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Patients with LE or DM frequently exhibit high levels of conventional risk factors for ASCVD events, particularly dyslipoproteinemia and hypertension; an amplified burden of atherosclerotic plaques; and increased age- and sex-adjusted rates of ASCVD events compared with the general population. The rate of ASCVD events exceeds what would be expected from conventional risk factors, suggesting that disease-specific autoimmune processes exacerbate specific, known pathogenic steps in atherosclerosis. Importantly, despite their heightened risk, patients with LE or DM are often undertreated for known causative agents and exacerbators of ASCVD. Herein, we propose an approach to assess and manage the heightened risk of ASCVD events in patients with LE or DM. Our approach is modeled in large part on established approaches to patients with diabetes mellitus or stage 3 or 4 chronic kidney disease, which are well-studied conditions that also show heightened risk for ASCVD events and have been explicitly incorporated into standard clinical guidelines for ASCVD. Based on the available evidence, we conclude that patients with LE or DM require earlier and more aggressive screening and management of ASCVD. We suggest that physicians consider implementing multipliers of conventional risk calculators to trigger earlier initiation of lifestyle modifications and medical therapies in primary prevention of ASCVD events, employ vascular imaging to quantify the burden of subclinical plaques, and treat to lower lipid targets using statins and newer therapies, such as PCSK9 inhibitors, that decrease ASCVD events in nonautoimmune cohorts. More clinical vigilance is needed regarding surveillance, prevention, risk modification, and treatment of dyslipidemias, hypertension, and smoking in patients with LE or DM. All of these goals are achievable.

BackgroundPatients with lupus erythematosus (LE) are at a heightened risk for clinical events, chiefly heart attacks and strokes, caused by atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). We recently proposed new guidelines to categorize levels of risk for future ASCVD events specifically in LE patients, with recommendations for management. Here, we assessed the state of current management of ASCVD event risk in light of these new recommendations.MethodsWe studied our entire UPenn Longitudinal Lupus Cohort of patients with cutaneous LE, without or with concurrent systemic LE, for whom we had full access to medical records (n=370, LE-ASCVD Study Cohort, years 2007-2021).ResultsOf our LE-ASCVD Study Cohort, 336/370 (90.8%) had a designated primary-care physician. By the new guidelines, the most recent plasma LDL cholesterol levels were above goal for 252/370 (68.1%) of the Cohort. Two hundred sixty-six (71.9%) had hypertension, which was under- or un-treated in 198/266 (74.4%). Of current smokers, 51/63 (81.0%) had no documented smoking cessation counseling or referrals. Diabetes was generally well-managed, and hypertriglyceridemia was uncommon. Of the Cohort, 254 patients qualified for two widely used online calculators in primary prevention that estimate the risk of an ASCVD event in the next 10 years: the ACC-ASCVD Risk Estimator Plus and QRisk3. We also stratified these 254 patients into the categories of ASCVD event risk we recently defined specifically for LE. Surprisingly, these three methods for estimating ASCVD event risk showed clinically meaningful agreement for only 100/254 (39.4%), i.e., discordance for over 60% that could affect clinical management. The documented rate of ASCVD events in the first 10 years after enrollment was 22.3% (95% CI 16.9%, 27.4%), indicating a high-risk population despite a preponderance of women and a median age at enrollment of only 47 years.ConclusionCutaneous LE patients are under-treated compared with the new guidelines and, accordingly, they experience a substantial burden of ASCVD events. Moreover, it is unclear how to accurately assess future ASCVD event risk in these patients – except that it is high – and this uncertainty may complicate clinical management. Efforts are underway to improve ASCVD event risk estimation and guideline implementation in lupus patients.

Aggarwal et al. recently reported results from the first successful phase III trial studying intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in dermatomyositis (DM). The study showed that improvement in disease activity was clinically and statistically significantly greater in those who received IVIG than in those who received placebo, allowing US Food and Drug Administration approval for use of IVIG in DM. Despite its success, this study also highlights several concerns that must be addressed to inform future trials in the field, particularly the inclusion of patients with skin-predominant/amyopathic and post-myopathic DM.

Antibody-binding of blood dendritic cell antigen 2 (BDCA2), which is expressed exclusively on plasmacytoid dendritic cells, suppresses the production of type I interferon that is involved in the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). The safety and efficacy of subcutaneous litifilimab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to BDCA2, in patients with SLE have not been extensively studied.We conducted a phase 2 trial of litifilimab involving participants with SLE. The initial trial design called for randomly assigning participants to receive litifilimab (at a dose of 50, 150, or 450 mg) or placebo administered subcutaneously at weeks 0, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20, with the primary end point of evaluating cutaneous lupus activity. The trial design was subsequently modified; adults with SLE, arthritis, and active skin disease were randomly assigned to receive either litifilimab at a dose of 450 mg or placebo. The revised primary end point was the change from baseline in the total number of active joints (defined as the sum of the swollen joints and the tender joints) at week 24. Secondary end points were changes in cutaneous and global disease activity. Safety was also assessed.A total of 334 adults were assessed for eligibility, and 132 underwent randomization (64 were assigned to receive 450-mg litifilimab, 6 to receive 150-mg litifilimab, 6 to receive 50-mg litifilimab, and 56 to receive placebo). The primary analysis was conducted in the 102 participants who had received 450-mg litifilimab or placebo and had at least four tender and at least four swollen joints. The mean (±SD) baseline number of active joints was 19.0±8.4 in the litifilimab group and 21.6±8.5 in the placebo group. The least-squares mean (±SE) change from baseline to week 24 in the total number of active joints was -15.0±1.2 with litifilimab and -11.6±1.3 with placebo (mean difference, -3.4; 95% confidence interval, -6.7 to -0.2; P = 0.04). Most of the secondary end points did not support the results of the analysis of the primary end point. Receipt of litifilimab was associated with adverse events, including two cases of herpes zoster and one case of herpes keratitis.In a phase 2 trial involving participants with SLE, litifilimab was associated with a greater reduction from baseline in the number of swollen and tender joints than placebo over a period of 24 weeks. Longer and larger trials are required to determine the safety and efficacy of litifilimab for the treatment of SLE. (Funded by Biogen; LILAC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02847598.).

The majority of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have cutaneous manifestations at some point in their disease course. The skin findings in SLE are classified as SLE-specific or SLE-nonspecific based on histopathologic findings. SLE-specific skin diseases include chronic cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE), subacute CLE, and acute CLE. There are subsets of skin lesions within each group and the likelihood of associated SLE varies among them. SLE-nonspecific lesions are more common in patients with SLE and tend to coincide with active systemic disease. SLE-nonspecific lesions may be seen as a feature of another disease process, including other connective tissue diseases. It is important for the rheumatologist to be familiar with the spectrum of cutaneous diseases in SLE to help prognosticate the likelihood of systemic disease and to ensure patients receive timely dermatologic care with the goal of controlling disease activity to prevent damage.

Cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) is an autoimmune disease that can occur with or without underlying systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and often has a profoundly negative impact on patient quality of life. There is substantial need for new and more effective therapies to treat CLE. CLE has a multifactorial pathogenesis that involves several key immune cells and pathways, including abnormalities in innate (e.g., type 1 interferon pathways) and adaptive immune responses (e.g., B and T cell autoreactivity), presenting multiple opportunities for more targeted therapies that do not require immunosuppression. Here we review several emerging therapies and their efficacy in CLE. Anifrolumab and belimumab have both been approved for the treatment of SLE in recent years, and clinical trial evidence suggests some forms of CLE may improve with these agents. Therapies currently in development that are being evaluated with CLE-specific outcome measures include BIIB059 and VIB7734, which target plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs), and iberdomide, a cereblon modulator. These novel therapies all have previously demonstrated clinical benefit in some forms of CLE. Other therapies which target molecules believed to play a role in CLE pathogenesis, such as Janus kinases (JAKs), spleen tyrosine kinase (SYK), interferon γ (IFNγ), IL-12, and IL-23, have been evaluated in lupus clinical trials with skin-specific outcomes but failed to meet their primary endpoints.

Objective To assess the role of the anti-TIF1γ auto-antibody (aAb) IgG2 isotype as a biomarker of cancer in anti-TIF1γ aAb-positive adult DM. Methods International multicentre retrospective study with the following inclusion criteria: (i) diagnosis of DM according to ENMC criteria; (ii) presence of anti-TIF1γ IgG aAb determined using an in-house addressable laser bead immunoassay (ALBIA) from cryopreserved serums sampled at time of DM diagnosis and (iii) available baseline characteristics and follow-up data until the occurrence of cancer and/or a minimum follow-up of 1 year for patients without known cancer at diagnosis. Detection and quantification of anti-TIF1γ IgG2 aAb was done using the in-house ALBIA. In addition, a recent ELISA commercial kit was used for anti-TIF1γ IgG aAb quantification. Results A total of 132 patients (mean age 55±15 years) of whom 72 (54.5%) had an associated cancer were analysed. The association between the presence of cancer and the presence of anti-TIF1γ IgG2 aAb was statistically significant (P = 0.026), with an OR of 2.26 (95% CI: 1.10, 4.76). Patients with cancer displayed significantly higher anti-TIF1γ IgG2 aAb ALBIA values with a median value of 1.15 AU/ml (IQR: 0.14–9.76) compared with 0.50 AU/ml (IQR: 0.14–1.46) for patients without cancer (P = 0.042). In addition, patients with cancer displayed significantly higher anti-TIF1γ IgG aAb ELISA values with a median value of 127.5 AU/ml (IQR: 81.5–139.6) compared with 93.0 AU/ml (IQR: 54.0–132.9) for patients without cancer (P = 0.004). Conclusion These results suggest considering anti-TIF1γ IgG2 ALBIA and IgG ELISA values as biomarkers of cancer in anti-TIF1 γ aAb-positive adult DM.

ImportanceMorphea is an insidious inflammatory disorder of the skin and deeper tissues. Determining disease activity is challenging yet important to medical decision-making and patient outcomes.ObjectiveTo develop and validate a scoring tool, the Morphea Activity Measure (MAM), to evaluate morphea disease activity of any type or severity that is easy to use in clinical and research settings.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis pilot diagnostic study was conducted from September 9, 2019, to March 6, 2020, in 2 phases: development and validation. During the development phase, 14 morphea experts (dermatologists and pediatric dermatologists) used a Delphi consensus method to determine items that would be included in the MAM. The validation phase included 8 investigators who evaluated the tool in collaboration with 14 patients with pediatric morphea (recruited from a referral center [Medical College of Wisconsin]) during a 1-day in-person meeting on March 6, 2020.Main Outcomes and MeasuresDuring the development phase, online survey items were evaluated by experts in morphea using a Likert scale (score range, 0-10, with 0 indicating not important and 10 indicating very important); agreement was defined as a median score of 7.0 or higher, disagreement as a median score of 3.9 or lower, and no consensus as a median score of 4.0 to 6.9. During the validation phase, reliability (interrater and intrarater agreement using intraclass correlation coefficients), validity (using the content validity index and κ statistics as well as correlations with the modified Localized Scleroderma Severity Index and the Physician Global Assessment of Activity using Spearman ρ coefficients), and viability (using qualitative interviews of investigators who used the MAM tool) were evaluated. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative variables. Data on race and ethnicity categories were collected but not analyzed because skin color was more relevant for the purposes of this study.ResultsAmong 14 survey respondents during the development phase, 9 (64.3%) were pediatric dermatologists and 5 (35.7%) were dermatologists. After 2 rounds, a final tool was developed comprising 10 items that experts agreed were indicative of morphea activity (new lesion in the past 3 months, enlarging lesion in the past 3 months, linear lesion developing progressive atrophy in the past 3 months, erythema, violaceous rim or color, warmth to the touch, induration, white-yellow or waxy appearance, shiny white wrinkling, and body surface area). The validation phase was conducted with 14 patients (median age, 14.5 years [range, 8.0-18.0 years]; 8 [57.1%] female), 2 dermatologists, and 6 pediatric dermatologists. Interrater and intrarater agreement for MAM total scores was good, with intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.844 (95% CI, 0.681-0.942) for interrater agreement and 0.856 (95% CI, 0.791-0.901) for intrarater agreement. Correlations between the MAM and the modified Localized Scleroderma Severity Index (Spearman ρ = 0.747; P P Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, the MAM was found to be a reliable, valid, and viable tool to measure pediatric morphea activity. Further testing to assess validity in adults and responsiveness to change is needed.

In this study, we evaluated Cutaneous Dermatomyositis Disease Area and Severity Index (CDASI) scores calculated from photos taken by trained clinic staff. We found excellent reliability between photographs and an in-person scoring of the CDASI activity portion in patients with dermatomyositis although the CDASI may be underestimated from photographs. More research is needed to determine if photographs taken outside the office setting may be used to assess clinical trials outcomes.

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is a rare, chronic antibody-mediated autoimmune blistering disease primarily affecting the elderly, with an age of onset over 60. Current treatment options are limited and involve the use of corticosteroids and immunosuppressants, but their long-term use is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In Japan, human intravenous immunoglobin is approved for the treatment of corticosteroid-refractory BP. However, no treatment option is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the management of BP. Therefore, developing effective therapies free of debilitating side effects is imperative. In this review, we summarize the main immunologic pathways involved in the pathogenesis of BP, with an emphasis on the role of eosinophils, immunoglobulins, cytokines such as the interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-5, and complements. We further discuss the latest advances with novel therapeutic targets tested for the management of BP. Ongoing efforts are needed to run well-designed controlled trials and test the efficacy and safety of investigational drugs while providing much-needed access to these medications for refractory patients who will not otherwise be able to afford them as off-label prescriptions.

BackgroundVaccination against COVID-19 reduces the risk of severe COVID-19 disease and death. However, few studies have examined the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine in patients with autoimmune skin disease.ObjectivesWe sought to determine the incidence of disease exacerbation in this population following COVID-19 vaccination as well as the associated factors.MethodsWe performed a chart review of all patients seen in the autoimmune skin disease clinic of the principal investigator during the study period. All patients included for analysis were systematically and prospectively asked about COVID-19 vaccination status, manufacturers, vaccine dates, autoimmune symptoms after the vaccine, and timing of symptom onset using a standardized template as part of their visit. Demographics and autoimmune disease diagnosis were also collected. Analysis used Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests.Results402 subjects were included for analysis. 85.6% of patients were fully vaccinated, with 12.9% unvaccinated and 1.5% partially vaccinated. 14.8% of fully vaccinated patients reported worsening autoimmune signs and symptoms after the vaccine. Fully vaccinated dermatomyositis patients were more likely to report worsening autoimmune signs and symptoms after the vaccine (22.7%) than fully vaccinated lupus erythematosus patients (8.6%) (p=0.009). Patients fully vaccinated with the Moderna vaccine trended towards an increased likelihood of reporting worsening autoimmune signs and symptoms after the vaccine (19.1%) than those with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (12.0%) (p=0.076). Of the patients who had autoimmune symptoms after vaccination, 20% had symptoms after the 1st dose, 82% after the 2nd dose, and 4% after the 3rd dose with median onset (95% confidence interval) of 7 (2,14), 14 (14,21), and 18 (7,28) days later, respectively.ConclusionsMore fully vaccinated dermatomyositis patients had exacerbation of autoimmune signs and symptoms after the vaccine than fully vaccinated lupus erythematosus patients. However, given the risks of COVID-19, clinicians should still promote vaccination in most patients with autoimmune skin disease.

The pathogenesis of cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) is multifactorial, and CLE is difficult to treat due to the heterogeneity of inflammatory processes among patients. Antimalarials such as hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and quinacrine (QC) have long been used as first-line systemic therapy; however, many patients do not respond to treatment with antimalarials and require systemic immunosuppressants that produce undesirable side effects. Given the complexity and the unpredictability of responses to antimalarial treatments in CLE patients, we sought to characterize the immunologic profile of patients with CLE stratified by subsequent treatment outcomes to identify potential biomarkers of inducible response.We performed mass cytometry imaging of multiple immune cell types and inflammation markers in treatment-naive skin biopsy samples from 48 patients with CLE to identify baseline immunophenotypes that may predict the response to antimalarial therapy. Patients were stratified according to their response to treatment with antimalarials, as HCQ responders, QC responders, or nonresponders.HCQ responders demonstrated increased CD4+ T cells compared to the QC responder group. Patients in the nonresponder group were found to have decreased Treg cells compared to QC responders and increased central memory T cells compared to HCQ responders. QC responders expressed increased phosphorylated stimulator of interferon genes (pSTING) and interferon-κ (IFNκ) compared to HCQ responders. Phosphorylated STING and IFNκ were found to be localized to conventional dendritic cells (cDCs), and the intensity of pSTING and IFNκ staining was positively correlated with the number of cDCs on a tissue and cellular level. Neighborhood analysis revealed decreased regulatory cell interactions in nonresponder patients. Hierarchical clustering revealed that nonresponder patients could be further differentiated based on expression of pSTAT2, pSTAT3, pSTAT4, pSTAT5, phosphorylated interferon regulatory factor 3 (pIRF3), granzyme B, pJAK2, interleukin-4 (IL-4), IL-17, and IFNγ.These findings indicate differential immune cell compositions between patients with CLE, offering guidance for future research on precision-based medicine and treatment response.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of deucravacitinib, an oral, selective, allosteric inhibitor of TYK2, in a phase II trial in adult patients with active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods: Adults with active SLE were enrolled from 162 sites in 17 countries. Patients (n = 363) were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive deucravacitinib 3 mg twice daily, 6 mg twice daily, 12 mg once daily, or placebo. The primary end point was SLE Responder Index 4 (SRI-4) response at week 32. Secondary outcomes assessed at week 48 included SRI-4, British Isles Lupus Assessment Group–based Composite Lupus Assessment (BICLA) response, Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index 50 (CLASI-50), Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS), and improvements in active (swollen plus tender), swollen, and tender joint counts. Results: At week 32, the percentage of patients achieving SRI-4 response was 34% with placebo compared to 58% with deucravacitinib 3 mg twice daily (odds ratio [OR] 2.8 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.5, 5.1]; P < 0.001 versus placebo), 50% with 6 mg twice daily (OR 1.9 [95% CI 1.0, 3.4]; P = 0.02 versus placebo), and 45% with 12 mg once daily (OR 1.6 [95% CI 0.8, 2.9]; nominal P = 0.08 versus placebo). Response rates were higher with deucravacitinib treatment for BICLA, CLASI-50, LLDAS, and joint counts compared to placebo. Rates of adverse events were similar across groups, except higher rates of infections and cutaneous events, including rash and acne, with deucravacitinib treatment. Rates of serious adverse events were comparable, with no deaths, opportunistic infections, tuberculosis infections, major adverse cardiovascular events, or thrombotic events reported. Conclusion: Deucravacitinib treatment elicited higher response rates for SRI-4 and other end points compared with placebo, with an acceptable safety profile, in adult patients with active SLE.

Drug development in lupus has improved over the past 10 years but still lags behind that of other rheumatic disease areas. Assessment of prospective lupus therapies in clinical trials has proved challenging for reasons that are multifactorial including the heterogeneity of the disease, study design limitations and a lack of validated biomarkers which greatly impacts regulatory decision-making. Moreover, most composite outcome measures currently used in trials do not include patient-reported outcomes. Given these factors, the Addressing Lupus Pillars for Health Advancement Global Advisory Committee members who serve on the drug development team identified an opportunity to convene a meeting to facilitate information sharing on completed and existing outcome measure development efforts. This meeting report highlights information presented during the meeting as well as a discussion on how the lupus community may work together with regulatory agencies to simplify and standardise outcome measures to accelerate development of lupus therapeutics.

Lupus is a complex disease that is often difficult to diagnose. Risks of diagnostic delays include non-specific signs and symptoms that mimic other diseases and a lack of diagnostic criteria and referral pathways for non-specialists. To address these issues, we convened a series of virtual meetings with members of our Addressing Lupus Pillars for Health Advancement clinical care team. Meeting participants included lupus physicians, treatment developers from biotechnology, patient advocacy group representatives from the Lupus Foundation of America and advocacy/government consultants. Causes and consequences of ambiguity in diagnosis and diagnostic delays were evaluated through historical, experiential and evidence-based accounts (survey data, literature reviews and patient testimonials). Discussions highlighted the need for a clearer understanding of the definition of lupus, the natural history of the disease and the need for advancements in biotechnology to support an accurate and timely diagnosis with the potential development of a lupus spectrum.

ObjectiveThe lack of standardised outcomes and outcome measures for cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) represents a substantial barrier to clinical trial design, comparative analysis and approval of novel investigative treatments. We aimed to develop a working core outcome set (COS) for CLE randomised controlled trials and longitudinal observational studies.MethodsWe conducted a multistage literature review of CLE and SLE studies to generate candidate domains and outcome measures. Domains were narrowed to a working core domain set. Outcome measures for core domains were identified and examined.ResultsProposed core domains include skin-specific disease activity and damage, investigator global assessment (IGA) of disease activity, symptoms (encompassing itch, pain and photosensitivity), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and patient global assessment (PtGA) of disease activity. Recommended physician-reported outcome measures include the Cutaneous Lupus Erythematous Disease Area and Severity Index (CLASI) and Cutaneous Lupus Activity IGA (CLA-IGA). For the domains of symptoms, HRQoL and PtGA of disease activity, we were unable to recommend one clearly superior instrument.ConclusionThis work represents a starting point for further refinement pending formal consensus activities and more rigorous evaluations of outcome measure quality. In the interim, the proposed working COS can serve as a much-needed guide for upcoming CLE clinical trials.

ObjectiveTo achieve consensus on a definition of remission in SLE (DORIS).BackgroundRemission is the stated goal for both patient and caregiver, but consensus on a definition of remission has been lacking. Previously, an international task force consisting of patient representatives and medical specialists published a framework for such a definition, without reaching a final recommendation.MethodsSeveral systematic literature reviews were performed and specific research questions examined in suitably chosen data sets. The findings were discussed, reformulated as recommendations and voted on.ResultsBased on data from the literature and several SLE-specific data sets, a set of recommendations was endorsed. Ultimately, the DORIS Task Force recommended a single definition of remission in SLE, based on clinical systemic lupus erythematosus disease activitiy index (SLEDAI)=0, Evaluator’s Global Assessment ConclusionThe 2021 DORIS definition of remission in SLE is recommended for use in clinical care, education, and research including clinical trials and observational studies.

Anti-synthetase syndrome (ASSD) is a heterogeneous autoimmune disease characterised by multi-system involvement with a wide variety of manifestations. Validated classification criteria are necessary to improve recognition and prevent misclassification, especially given the lack of reliable and standardised autoantibody testing. We systematically reviewed the literature to analyse proposed ASSD criteria, characteristics, and diagnostic performance. Methods We searched PubMed and Embase databases (01/01/1984 to 06/11/2018) and the ACR and EULAR meeting abstracts (2017-2018). Sensitivities, specificities, positive, negative likelihood ratios and risk of bias were calculated for ASSD criteria and key variables reported in the literature. We performed meta-analysis when appropriate. Results We retrieved 4,358 studies. We found 85 proposed ASSD criteria from a total of 82 studies. All but one study included anti-synthetase autoantibody (ARS) positivity in the ASSD criteria. Most studies required only one ASSD feature plus anti-ARS to define ASSD (n=64, 78%), whereas 16 studies required more than one ASSD variable plus anti-ARS. The only criteria not including anti-ARS positivity required 5 ASSD clinical features. We found limited data and wide variability in the diagnostic performance of each variable and definition proposed in the literature. Given these limitations we only meta-analysed the performance of individual muscle biopsy and clinical variables in diagnosing ASSD, which performed poorly. Conclusion The current ASSD criteria include a variety of serological, clinical, and histological features with wide variability amongst proposed definitions and the performance of these definitions has not been tested. This systematic literature review suggests the need for additional data and consensus-driven classification criteria for ASSD.

Many treatments are currently proposed for treating patients with bullous pemphigoid (BP). We assessed treatment modalities of BP depending on the different countries, BP extent, and patients' comorbidities. We surveyed worldwide experts about how they treat patients with BP. A total of 61 experts from 27 countries completed the survey. Severe and moderate BP were treated with oral prednisone (61.4 and 53.7%, respectively) or superpotent topical corticosteroids (CSs) (38.6 and 46.3%, respectively). Conventional immunosuppressants were more frequently combined with oral prednisone (74.5%) than with superpotent topical CS (37.5%) in severe BP. Topical CSs were mainly used in Europe in mild (81.1%), moderate (55.3%), and severe (54.3%) BP. In the United States of America and Asia, systemic CSs were mainly proposed for treating severe (77.8 and 100%, respectively), moderate (70 and 77.8%, respectively), and also mild (47.1 and 33.3%, respectively) BP. Most experts reduced the initial dose of oral CS in patients with diabetes mellitus (48.1%) or cardiac insufficiency (40.2%) but rarely changed BP treatment in patients with neurological disorders or neoplasia. This survey showed major differences in the way patients with BP are treated between AmeriPac countries (United State of America, Latin America, and Australia) and Asia on the one hand and Europe and the Middle East on the other hand.