Search

Purpose: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of gevokizumab for the treatment of Behçet's disease uveitis in a prospective, open-label, randomized phase 2 trial.Methods: Behçet's disease patients with new acute ocular exacerbation or at risk of exacerbation received 30 or 60 mg gevokizumab every 4 weeks intravenously or subcutaneously, on top of a stable regimen of immunosuppressives and corticosteroids (≤20 mg/day equivalent prednisolone). Patients withdrew in cases of ocular exacerbation.Results: A total of 21 patients were included (17 acute and 4 at-risk; mean duration of uveitis 45.6 ± 37.4 months). There were no serious adverse events related to gevokizumab. Recorded adverse events were mostly associated with exacerbation of uveitis or its complications. Response was evaluated for 14 acute patients and all showed rapid control of acute ocular exacerbation, mostly within 1 week, without any increase in corticosteroid dosage.Conclusions: Gevokizumab was well tolerated and rapidly controlled acute ocular exacerbations of Behçet's disease uveitis without the need for high-dose corticosteroid. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ocular involvement in Behçet disease (BD) is characterized by recurrent inflammatory attacks and spontaneous resolution of acute inflammatory signs. Both frequency and severity of uveitis attacks determine the magnitude of irreversible damage to intraocular structures and long-term visual prognosis. Recurrent attacks of occlusive retinal vasculitis lead to vision-threatening complications such as cystoid macular edema, retinal neovascularization, optic atrophy and retinal atrophy. This manuscript updates about the role of various drugs in the management of BD, discussing corticosteroids, disease modifying immunosuppressive drugs, and finally biologicals (anti-TNF-blocking agents and alpha interferon) which seem to be superior compared to all other available drugs in preventing loss of vision. Also recent findings from new biologicals will be summarized, and especially the role of these drugs in children will be discussed in detail. The authors suggest that at least moderate to severe retinal involvement should become treated with biologicals whenever available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To compare the clinical features and outcomes of HLA-B27-positive and HLA-B27-negative acute anterior uveitis (AAU) in a large Turkish patient population.Methods: Forty-four patients with HLA-B27-positive AAU and 65 with HLA-B27-negative AAU were reviewed retrospectively. HLA-B27 typing, gender, laterality, clinical features (fibrinous reaction, hypopyon formation), ocular complications, medical treatment, and final visual acuity were recorded. Statistical analyses included Student's t-test, Fisher's exact test, Yate's corrected Chi2 test, and Mann-Whitney U test. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results: Forty percent of all patients with AAU were found to be positive for HLA-B27 antigen. HLA-B27-positive AAU was significantly more common in males and HLA-B27-negative AAU in females. Unilateral or bilateral alternating AAU as well as fibrinous reaction and hypopyon formation were more common in HLA-B27-positive patients. Posterior iris synechiae and cataract formation were more common and systemic immunosuppressive agents were exclusively required in patients with HLA-B27-negative AAU. Visual outcome did not differ significantly between the HLA-B27-positive and HLA-B27-negative groups.Conclusions: HLA-B27 association is less common in Turkish patients with AAU than in other populations reported in the literature. Although distinct features of HLA-B27 uveitis were confirmed in our study, visual outcome did not differ from idiopathic AAU. Therefore, we believe that HLA-B27 typing in patients with AAU helps the clinician with the diagnosis. However, it has a limited value in determining the prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim To outline recommendations from an expert committee on the assessment and investigation of patients with severe inflammatory eye disease commencing immunosuppressive and/or biologic therapy. Method The approach to assessment is based on the clinical experience of an expert committee and a review of the literature with regard to corticosteroids, immunosuppressive drug and biologic therapy and other adjunct therapy in the management of patients with severe sight-threatening inflammatory eye disease. Conclusion We recommend a careful assessment and consultative approach by ophthalmologists or physicians experienced in the use of immunosuppressive agents for all patients commencing immunosuppressive and/or biologic therapy for sight threatening inflammatory eye disease with the aim of preventing infection, cardiovascular, metabolic and bone disease and reducing iatrogenic side effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]