Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services

User menu

  • My Cart
  • Log In
  • Log Out

Search

  • Advanced search
The Journal of Rheumatology
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services
  • My Cart
  • Log In
  • Log Out
The Journal of Rheumatology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • Follow jrheum on Twitter
  • Visit jrheum on Facebook
  • Follow jrheum on LinkedIn
  • Follow jrheum on RSS
Research ArticleArticle

Prevalence of TNF-α Blocker Immunogenicity in Psoriatic Arthritis

Michael Zisapel, Devy Zisman, Noa Madar-Balakirski, Uri Arad, Hagit Padova, Hagit Matz, Hagit Maman-Sarvagyl, Ilana Kaufman, Daphna Paran, Joy Feld, Ira Litinsky, Irena Wigler, Dan Caspi and Ori Elkayam
The Journal of Rheumatology January 2015, 42 (1) 73-78; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.140685
Michael Zisapel
From the Department of Rheumatology and Department of Dermatology, Tel Aviv Medical Center; Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv; Rheumatology Unit, Carmel Medical Center, Haifa, Israel.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Devy Zisman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Noa Madar-Balakirski
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Uri Arad
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hagit Padova
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hagit Matz
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hagit Maman-Sarvagyl
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ilana Kaufman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daphna Paran
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joy Feld
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ira Litinsky
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Irena Wigler
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dan Caspi
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ori Elkayam
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: oribe14@netvision.net.il
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • eLetters
PreviousNext
Loading

Abstract

Objective. The longterm use of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α blockers is limited by the formation of neutralizing antibodies. To the best of our knowledge, immunogenicity in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has not been investigated in depth. Our objective was to evaluate the prevalence and significance of TNF-α blocker immunogenicity in PsA.

Methods. Consecutive patients with PsA treated with either infliximab (IFX), adalimumab (ADA), or etanercept (ETN) > 3 months participated in our cross-sectional study. Their demographic and clinical characteristics, skin and joint disease activity, and records of use of methotrexate (MTX) and other medications were collected. Drug levels (ELISA) and antidrug antibodies (ADAb; Bridging ELISA) were evaluated before the next injection or infusion.

Results. A total of 93 patients with PsA were recruited (48 receiving ADA, 24 IFX, and 21 ETN), with a mean age of 53 years (range 21–83 yrs), composed of 53% women. One-fourth of the patients were concomitantly treated with MTX. Altogether, 77% of the patients demonstrated therapeutic drug levels. High levels of ADAb were found in 29% of patients taking ADA, 21% taking IFX, and 0% taking ETN. ADAb significantly correlated with lower drug levels, higher 28-joint Disease Activity Scores, and higher global assessments. MTX use correlated significantly with a lower prevalence of ADAb.

Conclusion. Significant levels of ADAb were present in up to 29% of patients with PsA treated with ADA or IFX. ADAb clearly correlated with low therapeutic drug levels and higher disease activity variables. The use of MTX significantly decreased ADAb prevalence, and its use should be strongly considered in combination with TNF-α blocker antibodies in patients with PsA.

Key Indexing Terms:
  • PSORIATIC
  • ARTHRITIS
  • IMMUNOGENICITY
  • INFLIXIMAB
  • ETANERCEPT
  • ADALIMUMAB

The management of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has been revolutionized by the use of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α blockers, such as infliximab (IFX), adalimumab (ADA), etanercept (ETN), and others1. Moreover, while in the past the use of TNF-α blockers was restricted in some chronic infections, such as latent tuberculosis (TB) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) positivity, today its use is no longer limited and its longterm administration is safe with proper chemoprophylaxis (latent TB) and close monitoring (HCV), as demonstrated by several reports2,3. Despite the ability of those agents to decrease disease activity, their longterm effect is limited in some patients. Limited drug efficacy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been partially attributed to the development of immunogenicity4,5,6. The creation of antibodies against anti-TNF-α drugs has been associated with low levels of TNF-α blockers7,8, hypersensitivity reactions9,10, and decreased therapeutic response (i.e., loss or absence of effect)11,12,13. The immunogenicity phenomenon has been described against monoclonal antibodies to TNF-α (IFX and ADA)14 and rarely to the soluble receptor (ETN)11,15,16,17,18,19,20,21.

The prevalence of antidrug antibodies (ADAb) in RA is between 20–40%, and it is reportedly reduced significantly by the use of methotrexate (MTX)11,12,19,22,23,24,25,26. Similar prevalence levels, and some even higher (up to 61%) have been described in patients with IBD, especially in Crohn disease (CD), while concomitant MTX and azathioprine (AZA) were shown to attenuate immunogenicity5,27,28,29. Studies on AS reported an ADAb prevalence of 25–64%6,13,18,30,31,32. About one-third of patients with psoriasis who were treated with IFX as monotherapy developed human antichimeric antibodies that were associated with a decreased therapeutic response18,33,34,35. It has been suggested that fixed time intervals between injections might reduce immunogenicity22. In addition, the effect of a simultaneous use of MTX was evaluated on a small number of patients, and the results indicated a reduced immunogenicity and an improvement of the clinical response36.

It appears that the immunogenicity of TNF-α blockers in PsA has not been thoroughly investigated. To the best of our knowledge, the only study that directly addressed this subject included 22 patients with PsA who were treated with ADA and had an ADAb prevalence of 18% that was associated with a decreased clinical response and low drug level37. Kavanaugh, et al’s earlier study on 200 patients with PsA (the Infliximab Multinational Psoriatic Arthritis Controlled Trial 2) was a phase III randomized controlled trial that evaluated safety and efficacy in patients with PsA receiving IFX, although it did not specifically evaluate immunogenicity38. Their results demonstrated an ADAb prevalence of 15% (26% in patients not taking MTX and 3.6% in patients taking concomitant MTX, not analyzed statistically).

MTX is the main immunomodulatory drug that moderates immunogenicity18,19,36,39,40,41. AZA attenuates immunogenicity in IBD similarly to MTX18,42,43,44, but this has not been reported in rheumatologic conditions such as RA, spondyloarthropathies (SpA), and psoriasis18. Moreover, there is insufficient evidence to support the role of other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (sulfasalazine, leflunomide, hydroxychloroquine, and cyclosporine A) or prednisolone in moderating ADAb formation18,39. The goals of our present study were to evaluate the prevalence of TNF-α blocker immunogenicity in PsA and its correlation to drug levels, disease activity, and the effect of concomitant use of MTX.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study design

We conducted a cross-sectional study (transversal analyses) on 93 patients with PsA treated with IFX, ADA, or ETN. The primary endpoint was the prevalence of ADAb to TNF-α blockers in PsA. The secondary endpoints were (1) the correlation between the presence of immunogenicity and drug levels, (2) demographic and clinical features (including disease activity scores), and (3) the effect of concomitant use of MTX. Patients’ enrollment was at the trough level of the anti-TNF-α drug, i.e., just before the next administration of the anti-TNF drug. Clinical assessment was performed and blood was drawn at this timepoint.

Study participants

The study was composed of consecutive patients with PsA according to the Classification for Psoriatic Arthritis criteria. They were aged above 18 years, and were undergoing intravenous IFX 5 mg/kg treatment according to the standard protocol, subcutaneous ADA 40 mg every other week, or SC ETN 50 mg/week. Patients who had been treated with IFX, ADA, or ETN for less than 3 months or who were receiving other TNF-α antagonists were excluded from the study.

Demographic data

Clinical data included the pattern of the PsA arthropathy, duration of psoriasis and PsA, comorbid conditions, and current drugs being taken (including MTX) and their dosage. Assessment of disease activity included the 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28), pain evaluation using a visual analog scale (VAS) of 100 mm, the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), and the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI). Blood was drawn for analyses of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate, anti-TNF-α drug level, and ADAb.

Assessment of drug levels and ADAb

The drug level was measured by ELISA (Promonitor commercial kit of the Progenika Biopharma group) and expressed in microgram per milliliter (µg/ml). The IFX detection threshold was 0.035 µg/ml: levels < 0.035 µg/ml were considered non-detectable, levels 0.035–1.5 µg/ml were considered subtherapeutic, and levels > 1.5 µg/ml were considered therapeutic. Those ranges were derived from clinical studies mainly in RA (and fewer in CD)44,45, including a study done by means of the Promonitor kit on 78 patients with RA for whom there were 612 blood samples. The detection threshold of ADA was 0.024 µg/ml: levels < 0.024 µg/ml were considered undetectable, levels 0.024–0.8 µg/ml were considered subtherapeutic, and levels > 0.8 µg/ml were considered therapeutic. Those ranges are derived from clinical studies45, including 1 done by means of the Promonitor kit on 51 patients with RA for whom there were 171 blood samples. The ETN detection threshold was 0.035 µg/ml. There are no therapeutic ranges because of the lack of data: levels < 0.035 µg/ml were considered undetectable and levels > 0.035 µg/ml were considered positive responses.

ADAb and their concentrations were tested by Bridging ELISA (Promonitor). Concentrations were expressed in absorbance units per milliliter (Au/ml). The anti-IFX antibodies detection threshold was 2 Au/ml. We defined a high concentration as the value of the threshold multiplied by 14, i.e., 28 Au/ml. The anti-ADA antibodies detection threshold was 3.5 Au/ml, and a high concentration was defined as a value of the threshold multiplied by 14, i.e., 50 Au/ml. The anti-ETN antibodies detection threshold was 142 Au/ml, and a high concentration was defined as a value of the threshold multiplied by 14, i.e., 2000 Au/ml.

It is noteworthy that high concentration of ADAb (“high” ADAb) is a term mainly used for anti-ADA antibodies. The customary value of a high concentration of antidrug antibodies is above 100 Au/ml for the radioimmunoassay (RIA) test, which is a multiplier of 8.5 from the threshold of positive test, which is 12 Au/ml19,32. To date, there is no data known to us that defines high ADAb in the Bridging ELISA test. According to the statistical distribution of ADAb in our study participants, and since the threshold of Bridging ELISA test for positive anti-ADA antibodies is 3.5 Au/ml, we defined high concentration as 50 Au/ml, using a multiplier of 14. We used rougher values with a multiplication by 14 (and not by 8.5) because Bridging ELISA is less accurate than RIA46,47. Indeed, these values were arbitrarily determined, but rationally and according to our participants’ ADAb levels distribution. A recent paper by Chen, et al has shown good concordance between RIA and Bridging ELISA, although again RIA was more accurate48.

Statistical analysis

Statistical processing was done by Excel (Microsoft Corp.) and SPSS (version 14, IBM Corp.) software. We used the Pearson chi-square test, Fisher’s exact test, and Spearman rank correlation coefficient test to obtain correlations between variables. The Student t test and ANOVA were used to compare the means of variables with normal distributions. Medians of variables without normal distribution were tested using the Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis test. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Demographic and clinical characteristics of the participants

Between March 2011 and April 2013, 93 patients with PsA were recruited into our study. Their mean age was 53 years (range 21–83 yrs), and 53% of the subjects were women. The mean durations of the skin disease and the arthropathy were 21 years and 15 years, respectively. The most common pattern of disease was peripheral polyarthritis (48.5%), followed by combined axial and peripheral (23.5%), oligoarthritis (21.5%), and pure axial (7.5%). Forty-eight patients were taking ADA (51.6%), 24 were taking IFX (25.8%), and 21 were taking ETN (22.6%). About one-fourth of the patients (25.8%) were concomitantly taking MTX at an average weekly dosage of 13.3 mg (Table 1).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Clinical and demographic data.

Table 2 summarizes the variables of disease activity. The mean DAS28 was 3.4 (moderate disease activity), the mean VAS was 27, the mean BASDAI was 3.95 (moderate to severe), and the mean PASI was 3.5 (mild). Patients receiving ETN presented a significantly milder degree of PsA, while IFX-treated patients had a more severe disease form according to DAS28. Patients treated with ADA had higher levels on the BASDAI. The severity of skin disease (by PASI) was similar for all medication groups.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Variables of disease activity.

ADAb prevalence and drug levels

The prevalence of immunogenicity in the whole group was 33.3% (Table 3). One-fifth of the patients had high concentrations of antibodies. None of the members of the ETN group had ADAb. Analysis of the levels of antibodies in the ADA group yielded 2 groups of patients: 54% of the entire group developed ADAb, but only 29% had high ADAb concentrations. ADAb to IFX was found in 21% of the IFX-treated patients, and all of them had high concentrations of antibodies. All of the patients taking ETN demonstrated therapeutic drug levels compared with 79% of the ADA-treated patients and 54% of the IFX-treated patients.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Drug levels and antibodies prevalence. Values are %.

Correlations between immunogenicity and drug levels

The presence of ADAb and high ADAb concentrations significantly correlated with nontherapeutic drug levels: 45% of ADAb-positive patients and 63% of high ADAb patients had nontherapeutic drug levels comparing to only 11% of patients without ADAb. Patients with ADAb (high and low titers) concentrations had a significantly higher DAS28 (3.9 and 4.1, respectively, compared with a score of only 3.2 in patients without ADAb) and a higher VAS (36 and 42, respectively, compared with a score of only 23). There was a trend toward a higher PASI, younger age, and male sex in the ADAb-positive patients; those values did not reach a level of significance (Table 4 and Table 5). The DAS28, VAS, and PASI scores were lower in patients with therapeutic drug levels compared to patients with nontherapeutic drug levels (3.3 vs 3.8, 25 vs 35, and 2.7 vs 6, respectively), but those values did not reach a level of statistical significance.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4.

Correlation between demographic and clinical data and the presence of antibodies.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 5.

Correlation between demographic and clinical data to antibodies concentration levels.

The effect of MTX on immunogenicity

One-fourth of the study subjects were treated concomitantly with MTX at a mean dosage of 13.3 mg/week. The MTX-treated patients were significantly older (59 yrs vs 51.5 yrs, p = 0.024). The MTX-treated patients had significantly fewer ADAb (i.e., 16.7% vs 39.1%, p = 0.049; Table 6). Moreover, fewer MTX-treated patients had high ADAb concentration (16.7% compared to 21.7% for the non-MTX patients). There was a nonsignificant trend toward a higher proportion of patients with therapeutic drug levels among the MTX-treated patients (92% vs 72.5% for the non-MTX patients). Interestingly, the MTX-treated patients had a higher DAS28 than the non-MTX patients (4 vs 3.2, p = 0.02).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 6.

Correlations between concomitant MTX use and immunogenicity, and drug level and demographic and clinical data.

DISCUSSION

TNF blockers have had an enormous effect on the treatment, course of disease, and prognosis of SpA, including PsA. Indeed, these biologic drugs represent a breakthrough in the management of these conditions. However, the use of these agents has been limited by the phenomenon of immunogenicity, which might induce low drug levels and decreased clinical response in RA, AS, and IBD.

The results of our cross-sectional study have demonstrated that the phenomenon of immunogenicity is limited to IFX and ADA in patients with PsA. The results showed that it reaches a level of up to 50% in ADA-treated patients (29% with high levels), 21% in IFX-treated patients, and none in ETN-treated patients. A clear correlation was found between the presence of immunogenicity, drug levels, and clinical response. The use of MTX significantly decreased the proportion of ADAb.

Our results are similar to the prevalence of immunogenicity in RA11,22,23. As others had found in RA11,12, we observed a correlation between ADAb and low drug levels and decreased clinical response. Interestingly, the effect of immunogenicity in our study was more prominent in active peripheral arthritis, as reflected by DAS28, than in axial arthropathy, as reflected by BASDAI.

Another important finding in our study was the clearly reduced immunogenicity in patients who were also receiving MTX, as had been shown in RA22,23. While the concomitant use of MTX with monoclonal antibodies is indicated in RA, there are no similarly clear recommendations in PsA. Our results suggest that the use of MTX should be strongly considered in addition to monoclonal antibodies.

Noteworthy, the patients taking ADA demonstrated an immunogenicity of 54%, but only half of them (29%) showed high concentrations of antibodies. This finding suggests that a variety of levels might be found that might affect the significance of immunogenicity differently among patients producing ADAb.

Most of the known literature about immunogenicity of SpA is in the setting of AS, where its prevalence is about 25%, with correlations between monoclonal ADAb and low drug levels, decreased clinical response, and a high rate of injection-induced hypersensitivity reactions6,13,31. A recent trial by Kneepkens, et al demonstrated an ADAb prevalence of 27% with a correlation to decreased clinical response in patients treated with ADA32. Moreover, those authors found, as we did, a correlation between high ADAb concentrations and decreased clinical response in ADA-treated patients. Studies of immunogenicity in patients with psoriasis demonstrated that ADAb is correlated to IFX and ADA, but not to ETN. Its prevalence was up to one-third, and there was a correlation to decreased drug levels and decreased therapeutic response33,34,35,42,49. The concomitant use of MTX reduced ADAb prevalence in SpA and psoriasis, but unlike RA, it is not clear whether it improved anti-TNF efficacy18. On the other hand, attenuating anti-TNF immunogenicity may be even more crucial because there are fewer alternative classes of biologics to use in the event of treatment failure.

Our study has several limitations. It is cross-sectional and based on a relatively small number of patients. The evaluation of ADAb was performed using Bridging ELISA, which is reliable, but considered to be less accurate than RIA46,47,48. Likewise, the evaluation of disease activity was based on DAS28, which might not be ideal in PsA.

Similar to RA, the phenomenon of immunogenicity is present in PsA as well, with a prevalence of up to 50%. Immunogenicity clearly affected the therapeutic effect of the monoclonal antibodies and seemed to be attenuated by the concomitant use of MTX. Large-scale studies are warranted to confirm our observations.

  • Accepted for publication September 8, 2014.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Cantini F,
    2. Niccoli L,
    3. Nannini C,
    4. Kaloudi O,
    5. Bertoni M,
    6. Cassarà E
    . Psoriatic arthritis: a systemic review. Int J Rheum Dis 2010; 13:300–17.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Atteno M,
    2. Costa L,
    3. Matarese A,
    4. Caso F,
    5. Del Puente A,
    6. Cantarini L,
    7. et al.
    The use of TNF-α blockers in psoriatic arthritis patients with latent tuberculosis infection. Clin Rheumatol 2014;33:543–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Costa L,
    2. Caso F,
    3. Atteno M,
    4. Giannitti C,
    5. Spadaro A,
    6. Ramonda R,
    7. et al.
    Long-term safety of anti-TNF-α in PsA patients with concomitant HCV infection: a retrospective observational multicenter study on 15 patients. Clin Rheumatol 2014;33:273–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Baert F,
    2. De Vos M,
    3. Louis E,
    4. Vermeire S; and
    5. Belgian IBD Research Group
    . Immunogenicity of infliximab: how to handle the problem? Acta Gastroenterol Belg 2007;70:163–70.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Pendley C,
    2. Schantz A,
    3. Wagner C
    . Immunogenicity of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies. Curr Opin Mol Ther 2003;5:172–9.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Aybay C,
    2. Ozel S,
    3. Aybay C
    . Demonstration of specific antibodies against infliximab induced during treatment of a patient with ankylosing spondylitis. Rheumatol Int 2006;26:473–80.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Sethu S,
    2. Govindappa K,
    3. Alhaidari M,
    4. Pirmohamed M,
    5. Park K,
    6. Sathish J
    . Immunogenicity to biologics: mechanisms, prediction and reduction. Arch Immunol Ther Exp 2012;60:331–44.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. 8.↵
    1. Aarden L,
    2. Ruuls SR,
    3. Wolbink GJ
    . Immunogenicity of anti-tumor necrosis factor antibodies-toward improved methods of anti-antibody measurement. Curr Opin Immunol 2008;20:431–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Cheifetz A,
    2. Mayer L
    . Monoclonal antibodies, immunogenicity and associated infusion reactions. Mt Sinai J Med 2005;72:250–6.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Baret F,
    2. Noman M,
    3. Vermeire S,
    4. Van Assche G,
    5. D’Haens G,
    6. Carbonez A,
    7. et al.
    Influence of immunogenicity on the long-term efficacy of infliximab in Crohn’s disease. N Engl J Med 2003;348:601–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Radstake TR,
    2. Svenson M,
    3. Eijsbouts AM,
    4. van den Hoogen FH,
    5. Enevold C,
    6. van Riel PL,
    7. et al.
    Formation of antibodies against infliximab and adalimumab strongly correlates with functional drug levels and clinical responses in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:1739–45.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Wolbink GJ,
    2. Vis M,
    3. Lems W,
    4. Voskuyl AE,
    5. de Groot E,
    6. Nurmohamed MT,
    7. et al.
    Development of antiinfliximab antibodies and relationship to clinical response in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:711–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. de Vries MK,
    2. Wolbink GJ,
    3. Stapel SO,
    4. de Vrieze H,
    5. van Denderen JC,
    6. Dijkmans BA,
    7. et al.
    Decreased clinical response to infliximab in ankylosing spondylitis is correlated with anti-infliximab formation. Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:1252–4.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Bartelds GM,
    2. Wolbink GJ,
    3. Stapel S,
    4. Aarden L,
    5. Lems WF,
    6. Dijkmans BA,
    7. et al.
    High levels of human anti-human antibodies to adalimumab in a patient not responding to adalimumab treatment. Ann Rheum Dis 2006;65:1249–50.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. Jamnitski A,
    2. Krieckaert CL,
    3. Nurmohamed MT,
    4. Hart MH,
    5. Dijkmans BA,
    6. Aarden L,
    7. et al.
    Patients non-responding to etanercept obtain lower etanercept concentrations compared with responding patients. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:88–91.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Krieckaert CL,
    2. Jamnitski A,
    3. Nurmohamed MT,
    4. Kostense PJ,
    5. Boers M,
    6. Wolbink G,
    7. et al.
    Comparison of long-term clinical outcome with etanercept treatment and adalimumab treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with respect to immunogenicity. Arthritis Rheum 2012;64:3850–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. de Vries MK,
    2. van der Horst-Bruinsma IE,
    3. Nurmohamed MT,
    4. Aarden LA,
    5. Stapel SO,
    6. Peters MJ,
    7. et al.
    Immunogenicity does not influence treatment with etanercept in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:531–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Jani M,
    2. Barton A,
    3. Warren RB,
    4. Griffiths CE,
    5. Chinoy H
    . The role of DMARDs in reducing the immunogenicity of TNF inhibitors in chronic inflammatory diseases. Rheumatology 2014;53:213–22.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. 19.↵
    1. Aikawa NE,
    2. de Carvalho JF,
    3. Almeida Silva CA,
    4. Bonfa E
    . Immunogenicity of anti-TNF agents in autoimmune diseases. Clinic Rev Allerg Immunol 2010;38:82–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  20. 20.↵
    1. Atzeni F,
    2. Talotta R,
    3. Salaffi F,
    4. Cassinotti A,
    5. Varisco V,
    6. Battellino M,
    7. et al.
    Immunogenicity and autoimmunity during anti-TNF therapy. Autoimmun Rev 2013;12:703–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Klareskog L,
    2. Gaubitz M,
    3. Rodríguez-Valverde V,
    4. Malaise M,
    5. Dougados M,
    6. Wajdula J; and
    7. Etanercept Study 301 Investigators
    . Assessment of long-term safety and efficacy of etanercept in a 5-year extension study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2011;29:238–47.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Maini RN,
    2. Breedveld FC,
    3. Kalden JR,
    4. Smolen JS,
    5. Davis D,
    6. Macfarlane JD,
    7. et al.
    Therapeutic efficacy of multiple intravenous infusions of anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha monoclonal antibody combined with low-dose weekly methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1998;41:1552–63.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Bartelds GM,
    2. Wijbrandts CA,
    3. Nurmohamed MT,
    4. Stapel S,
    5. Lems WF,
    6. Aarden L,
    7. et al.
    Clinical response to adalimumab: relationship to anti-adalimumab antibodies and serum adalimumab concentrations in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:921–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Ollendorf DA,
    2. Massarotti E,
    3. Birbara C,
    4. Burgess SM
    . Frequency, predictors, and economic impact of upward dose adjustment of infliximab in managed care patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Manag Care Pharm 2005;11:383–93.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. St Clair EW,
    2. Wagner CL,
    3. Fasanmade AA,
    4. Wang B,
    5. Schaible T,
    6. Kavanaugh A,
    7. et al.
    The relationship of serum infliximab concentrations to clinical improvement in rheumatoid arthritis: results from ATTRACT, a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 2002;46:1451–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Pascual-Salcedo D,
    2. Plasencia C,
    3. Ramiro S,
    4. Nuño L,
    5. Bonilla G,
    6. Nagore D,
    7. et al.
    Influence of immunogenicity on the efficacy of long-term treatment with infliximab in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology 2011;50:1445–52.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    1. Cassinotti A,
    2. Travis S
    . Incidence and clinical significance of immunogenicity to infliximab in Crohn’s disease: a critical systematic review. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2009;15:1264–75.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Sandborn W
    . Preventing antibodies to infliximab in patients with Crohn’s disease: optimize not immunize. Gastroenterology 2003;124:1140–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Rutgeerts P,
    2. Feagan BG,
    3. Lichtenstein GR,
    4. Mayer LF,
    5. Schreiber S,
    6. Colombel JF,
    7. et al.
    Comparison of scheduled and episodic treatment strategies of infliximab in Crohn’s disease. Gastroenterology 2004;126:202–13.
    OpenUrl
  30. 30.↵
    1. de Vries MK,
    2. Wolbink GJ,
    3. Stapel SO,
    4. de Groot ER,
    5. Dijkmans BA,
    6. Aarden LA,
    7. et al.
    Inefficacy of infliximab in ankylosing spondylitis is correlated with antibody formation. Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:133–4.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  31. 31.↵
    1. Ducourau E,
    2. Mulleman D,
    3. Paintaud G,
    4. Miow Lin DC,
    5. Lauféron F,
    6. Ternant D,
    7. et al.
    Antibodies toward infliximab are associated with low infliximab concentrations at treatment initiation and poor infliximab maintenance in rheumatic diseases. Arthritis Res Ther 2011;13:R105.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. Kneepkens EL,
    2. Wei JC,
    3. Nurmohamed MT,
    4. Yeo KJ,
    5. Chen CY,
    6. van der Horst-Bruinsma IE,
    7. et al.
    Immunogenicity, adalimumab levels and clinical response in ankylosing spondylitis patients during 24 weeks of follow up. Ann Rheum Dis 2013 Dec 10 (E-pub ahead of print).
  33. 33.↵
    1. Adisen E,
    2. Aral A,
    3. Aybay C,
    4. Gürer MA
    . Anti-infliximab antibody status and its relation to clinical response in psoriatic patients: a pilot study. J Dermatol 2010;37:708–13.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Menter A,
    2. Feldman SR,
    3. Weinstein GD,
    4. Papp K,
    5. Evans R,
    6. Guzzo C,
    7. et al.
    A randomized comparison of continuous vs. intermittent infliximab maintenance regimens over 1 year in the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. J Am Acad Dermatol 2007;56:1–15.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    1. Cozzani E,
    2. Burlando M,
    3. Parodi A
    . Detection of antibodies to anti-TNF agents in psoriatic patients: a preliminary study. G Ital Dermatol Venereol 2013;148:171–4.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    1. Lecluse LL,
    2. Druesseb RJ,
    3. Spuls PI,
    4. de Jong EM,
    5. Stapel SO,
    6. van Doorn MB,
    7. et al.
    Extent and clinical consequences of antibody formation against adalimumab in patients with plaque psoriasis. Arch Dermatol 2010;146:127–32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. 37.↵
    1. van Kuijk AW,
    2. de Groot M,
    3. Stapel SO,
    4. Dijkmans BA,
    5. Wolbink GJ,
    6. Tak PP
    . Relationship between the clinical response to adalimumab treatment and serum levels of adalimumab and anti-adalimumab antibodies in patients with psoriatic arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:624–5.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  38. 38.↵
    1. Kavanaugh A,
    2. Krueger GG,
    3. Beutler A,
    4. Guzzo C,
    5. Zhou B,
    6. Dooley LT,
    7. et al.
    Infliximab maintains a high degree of clinical response in patients with active psoriatic arthritis through 1 year of treatment: results from the IMPACT 2 trail. Ann Rheum Dis 2007;66:498–505.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. 39.↵
    1. Bendtzen K,
    2. Geborek P,
    3. Svenson M,
    4. Larsson L,
    5. Kapetanovic MC,
    6. Saxne T
    . Individualized monitoring of drug bioavailability and immunogenicity in rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitor infliximab. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:3782–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    1. Krieckaert CL,
    2. Nurmohamed MT,
    3. Wolbing GJ
    . Methotrexate reduces immunogenicity in adalimumab treated rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:1914–5.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  41. 41.↵
    1. Garces S,
    2. Demengeot J,
    3. Benito-Garcia E
    . The immunogenicity of anti-TNF therapy in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: a systematic review of the literature with a meta-analysis. Ann Rheum Dis 2013;72:1947–55.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  42. 42.↵
    1. Maneiro JR,
    2. Salgado E,
    3. Gomez-Reino JJ
    . Immunogenicity of monoclonal antibodies against tumor necrosis factor used in chronic immune-mediated inflammatory conditions. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173:1416–28.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    1. Vermire S,
    2. Noman M,
    3. Van Assche G,
    4. Baert F,
    5. D’Haens G,
    6. Rutgeerts P
    . Effectiveness of concomitant immunosuppressive therapy in suppressing the formation of antibodies to infliximab in Crohn’s disease. Gut 2007;56:1226–31.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    1. Steenholdt C,
    2. Bendtzen K,
    3. Brynskov J,
    4. Thomsen OØ,
    5. Ainsworth MA
    . Cut-off levels and diagnostic accuracy of infliximab trough levels and anti-infliximab antibodies in Crohn’s disease. Scand J Gastroenterol 2011;46:310–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. 45.↵
    1. Llinares-Tello F,
    2. de Salazar JR,
    3. Gallego JM,
    4. Soler GS,
    5. Ramírez CS,
    6. Heredia ES,
    7. et al.
    Analytical and clinical evaluation of new immunoassay for therapeutic drug monitoring of infliximab and adalimumab. Clin Chem Lab Med 2012;50:1845–7.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  46. 46.↵
    1. Svenson M,
    2. Geborek P,
    3. Saxne T,
    4. Bendtzen K
    . Monitoring patients treated with anti-TNF alpha biopharmaceuticals: assessing serum infliximab and anti-infliximab antibodies. Rheumatology 2007;46:1828–34.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  47. 47.↵
    1. Hart MH,
    2. De Vrieze H,
    3. Wouters D,
    4. Wolbink GJ,
    5. Aarden LA,
    6. Killestein J,
    7. et al.
    Differential effect of drug interference in immunogenicity assays. J Immunol Meth 2011;372:196–203.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. 48.↵
    1. Chen D-Y,
    2. Chen Y-M,
    3. Tsai W-C,
    4. Tseng J-C,
    5. Chen Y-H,
    6. Hsieh C-W,
    7. et al.
    Significant associations of antidrug antibody levels with serum drug through and therapeutic response of adalimumab and etanercept treatment in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2014;0:1–9.
    OpenUrl
  49. 49.↵
    1. Menting SP,
    2. van Lümig PP,
    3. de Vries AC,
    4. van den Reek JM,
    5. van der Kleij D,
    6. de Jong EM
    . Extent and consequences of antibody formation against adalimumab in patients with psoriasis: one-year follow-up. JAMA Dermatol 2014;150:130–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Rheumatology
Vol. 42, Issue 1
1 Jan 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by Author
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about The Journal of Rheumatology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Prevalence of TNF-α Blocker Immunogenicity in Psoriatic Arthritis
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from The Journal of Rheumatology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the The Journal of Rheumatology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Prevalence of TNF-α Blocker Immunogenicity in Psoriatic Arthritis
Michael Zisapel, Devy Zisman, Noa Madar-Balakirski, Uri Arad, Hagit Padova, Hagit Matz, Hagit Maman-Sarvagyl, Ilana Kaufman, Daphna Paran, Joy Feld, Ira Litinsky, Irena Wigler, Dan Caspi, Ori Elkayam
The Journal of Rheumatology Jan 2015, 42 (1) 73-78; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.140685

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

 Request Permissions

Share
Prevalence of TNF-α Blocker Immunogenicity in Psoriatic Arthritis
Michael Zisapel, Devy Zisman, Noa Madar-Balakirski, Uri Arad, Hagit Padova, Hagit Matz, Hagit Maman-Sarvagyl, Ilana Kaufman, Daphna Paran, Joy Feld, Ira Litinsky, Irena Wigler, Dan Caspi, Ori Elkayam
The Journal of Rheumatology Jan 2015, 42 (1) 73-78; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.140685
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Save to my folders

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • eLetters

Keywords

PSORIATIC
ARTHRITIS
IMMUNOGENICITY
INFLIXIMAB
ETANERCEPT
ADALIMUMAB

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • STRATUS: A Phase II Study of Abituzumab in Patients With Systemic Sclerosis–associated Interstitial Lung Disease
  • National Sjögren’s Foundation Survey: Burden of Oral and Systemic Involvement on Quality of Life
  • Comparing the Visual Analog Scale and the Numerical Rating Scale in Patient-reported Outcomes in Psoriatic Arthritis
Show more Article

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • PSORIATIC
  • arthritis
  • IMMUNOGENICITY
  • infliximab
  • ETANERCEPT
  • ADALIMUMAB

Content

  • First Release
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Collections
  • Audiovisual Rheum
  • COVID-19 and Rheumatology

Resources

  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Author Payment
  • Reviewers
  • Advertisers
  • Classified Ads
  • Reprints and Translations
  • Permissions
  • Meetings
  • FAQ
  • Policies

Subscribers

  • Subscription Information
  • Purchase Subscription
  • Your Account
  • Terms and Conditions

More

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • My Alerts
  • My Folders
  • RSS Feeds
The Journal of Rheumatology
The content of this site is intended for health care professionals.
Copyright © 2016 by The Journal of Rheumatology Publishing Co. Ltd.
Print ISSN: 0315-162X; Online ISSN: 1499-2752
Powered by HighWire