Background Remission is the primary objective of treating juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). It is still debatable whether early intensive treatment is superior in terms of earlier achievement of remission. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of early etanercept+methotrexate (ETA+MTX) combination therapy versus step-up MTX monotherapy with ETA added in refractory disease. Methods A multi-centre, double-blind, randomized study in active polyarticular JIA patients treated with either ETA+MTX (n = 35) or placebo+MTX (n = 33) for up to 24 weeks, followed by a 24-week open-label phase. The efficacy endpoints included pedACR30 criteria improvement at week 12, inactive disease at week 24, and remission at week 48. Patients who failed to achieve the endpoints at week 12 or at week 24 escaped to open-label ETA+MTX. Safety was assessed at each visit. Results By intention-to-treat analysis, more patients in the ETA+MTX group reached the pedACR30 response at week 12 (33 (94.3%)) than in the placebo+MTX group (20 (60.6%); p = 0.001). At week 24, comparable percentages of patients reached inactive disease (11 (31.4%) vs 11 (33.3%)). At week 48, 11 (31.4%) and eight (24.2%) patients achieved remission. The median (+/−IQR) times to achieve an inactive disease state in the ETA+MTX and placebo+MTX groups were 24 (14–32) and 32 (24–40) weeks, respectively. Forty-four (74/100 patient-years) adverse events (AEs) were reported, leading to treatment discontinuation in 6 patients. Conclusions Early combination therapy with ETA+MTX proved to be highly effective compared to the standard step-up regimen. Compared to those treated with the standard regimen, more patients treated with a combination of ETA+MTX reached the pedACR30 response and achieved inactive disease and remission more rapidly.

BackgroundA significant number of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA) patients discontinue biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) due to lack of efficacy or safety concerns. Studies of biologic therapy switch regimens in sJIA are required.MethodsPatients with sJIA who switched from tocilizumab (due to lack of efficacy or safety) to canakinumab (4 mg/kg every 4 weeks) and were hospitalized at the rheumatology department from August 2012 to July 2020 were included. Primary efficacy outcomes were 30% or greater improvement based on the paediatric criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR30), achievement of inactive disease (JADAS-71 = 0) and clinical remission (ACR sJIA clinical inactive disease criteria). Follow-up from time first canakinumab dose administered was 12 months or the closest time point (not less than 6 and not more than 18 months). Data were extracted from electronic outpatient medical records.ResultsDuring the study period, 46 patients with sJIA switched from tocilizumab to canakinumab. Median age at baseline was 8.2 [interquartile range (IQR) 4.0–12.9] years, with the median sJIA duration being 1.8 (IQR 0.8–5.8) years; 37 (80%) patients received at least one conventional DMARD (cDMARD; oral corticosteroids, methotrexate and/or cyclosporine A). Study outcomes were followed up in 45 patients (one patient did not attend the follow-up for an unknown reason); median follow-up was 359 (IQR 282–404) days. During the follow-up, 1 patient discontinued canakinumab due to tuberculosis detection and the dose was reduced or the injection interval increased in 4 (9%) patients. In total, 27 (60%) patients continued to receive at least one cDMARD. Improvement according to the ACR30 criteria was achieved in 43 patients [96%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 85–99], inactive disease in 42 (93%; 95%CI 82–98), and remission in 37 (82%; 95% CI 69-91); after adjustment for actual time-at-risk, the rates were 83, 85 and 73 events per 100 person-years, respectively. During follow-up, 23 AEs (most frequently infections) were reported in 19/45 (42%) patients; 5/45 (11%) patients developed macrophage activation syndrome, with a favorable outcome in all cases.ConclusionsOne-year canakinumab therapy was found to be potentially effective as second-line biologic therapy after discontinuation of tocilizumab in patients with sJIA.

Background Remission is the primary objective of treating juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). It is still debatable whether early intensive treatment is superior in terms of earlier achievement of remission. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of early etanercept+methotrexate (ETA+MTX) combination therapy versus step-up MTX monotherapy with ETA added in refractory disease. Methods A multi-centre, double-blind, randomized study in active polyarticular JIA patients treated with either ETA+MTX (n=35) or placebo+MTX (n=33) for up to 24 weeks, followed by a 24-week open-label phase. The efficacy endpoints included pedACR30 criteria improvement at week 12, inactive disease at week 24, and remission at week 48. Patients who failed to achieve the endpoints at week 12 or at week 24 escaped to open-label ETA+MTX. Safety was assessed at each visit. Results By intention-to-treat analysis, more patients in the ETA+MTX group reached the pedACR30 response at week 12 (33 (94.3%)) than in the placebo+MTX group (20 (60.6%); p=0.001). At week 24, comparable percentages of patients reached inactive disease (11 (31.4%) vs 11 (33.3%)). At week 48, 11 (31.4%) and eight (24.2%) patients achieved remission. The median (+/-IQR) times to achieve an inactive disease state in the ETA+MTX and placebo+MTX groups were 24 (14–32) and 32 (24–40) weeks, respectively. Forty-four (74/100 patient-years) adverse events (AEs) were reported, leading to treatment discontinuation in 6 patients.Conclusions Early combination therapy with ETA+MTX proved to be highly effective compared to the standard step-up regimen. Compared to those treated with the standard regimen, more patients treated with a combination of ETA+MTX reached the pedACR30 response and achieved inactive disease and remission more rapidly.Trial registrationThe study was registered by the European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT) as 2015-003384-11 on 07-21-2014.

In most cases, COVID-19 has a favorable outcome. However, the risk of developing critical forms of the disease, including secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis HLH (cytokine storm syndrome), remains high. This dictates the interest in studying pathogenetic mechanisms, features of the clinical picture, laboratory and instrumental criteria for covid-19 disease. The article analyzes the causes of acute respiratory distress syndrome and multiple organ failure as manifestations of HLH. The necessity of monitoring signs of hyperinflammation (ferritin, C-reactive protein, etc., biomarkers of inflammation) and activation of thrombosis is substantiated, in order to make timely decisions about the beginning of pathogenetic therapy. However, there are limitations for routine testing of the level of Pro-inflammatory cytokines. Information about the diagnostic criteria of HLH is summarized, and the expediency of these criteria for establishing secondary HLH, which has complicated the course of COVID-19, is emphasized.

Background:Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) is a monogenic autoinflammatory hereditary disease characterized by recurrent episodes of fever with sterile peritonitis, pleural inflammation, arthritis, and/or erysipelas-like rash. Among all variants of the MEFV gene, according to the literature, five pathogenic ones have been identified, which in 75% of cases lead to the development of a typical clinical presentation: V726A, M694V, M694I, M680I, and E148Q. Among them, the M694V variant is the most common and occurs in patients with FMF in 20-65% of cases. At the same time, approximately 10 to 20% of patients meeting the diagnostic criteria for FMF do not have pathogenic variants in the MEFV gene. Despite the fact that the molecular genetic, pathogenetic and clinical features of the disease have been studied detailed, the diagnosis remains difficult due to the lack of a clear correlation between the patient’s clinical and genetic data.Objectives:To analyze the obtained genetic data of patients with pathogenic variants in the MEFV gene.Methods:The study included 103 patients who are mainly observed at the rheumatology department of the National Medical Research Center of Children’s Health of Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation in Moscow. All patients underwent analysis of the MEFV gene using Sanger sequencing with further statistical processing of the data obtained.Results:Of 103 patients, the pathogenic variant of the MEFV gene was found in 93 patients (90.3%), in 10 patients (9.7%) - the pathogenicity of the revealed variant was contradictory. Of 93 patients with the pathogenic variant of MEFV, the clinical presentation of the disease fits to FMF in 37 patients (39.6%). 11 (29.7%) of them had a mutation in M694V. Out of 37 children who met the criteria for FMF diagnosis, 15 (40.5%) children had a homozygous pathogenic variant of MEVF, and 22 (59.5%) children had two mutations in a heterozygous state. 57 patients who do not have a typical clinical presentation, which is specifical for FMF are observed at the departments of rheumatology, cardiology and nephrology, 13 patients are on an outpatient observation, and 6 patients at the time of the study are over 18 years old. 8 (14%) of them had a mutation in M694V. Among 57 patients with pathogenic heterozygous variants in a, 22 patients (38.6%) are observed in the rheumatology department, among them:• Enthesitis-related arthritis - 2 patients (9%);• Systemic juvenile arthritis - 13 patients (59%);• Oligoarthritis - 5 patients (23%);• Polyarthritis- 2 patients (9%).Conclusion:Analysis of the obtained data showed that FMF is characterized by a combination of the clinical presentation and the pathogenic variant in the MEFV gene. However, the disease manifests itself not only in the homozygous pathogenic variant, but also in the combination of two mutations in heterozygous. The presence of one heterozygous mutation, generally, does not lead to the development of FMF.References:[1]Konstantopoulos, A. Kanta, C. Deltas, V. Atamian, D. Mavrogianni, A.G. Tzioufas, I. Kollainis, K. Ritis, H.M. Moutsopoulos, Familial Mediterranean fever associated pyrin mutations in Greece Ann. Rheum. Dis., 62 (2003), pp. 479-481, 10.1136/ard.62.5.479.[2]Gershoni-Baruch R, Brik R, Zacks N, Shinawi M, Lidar M, Livneh A: The contribution of genotypes at the MEFV and SAA1 loci to amyloidosis and disease severity in patients with Mediterranean Fever,Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism,Volume 43, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 387-391familial Mediterranean fever. Arthritis Rheum 2003; 48: 1149–1155.[3]Booty MG, Chae JJ, Masters SL, et al. Familial Mediterranean fever with a single MEFV mutation: where is the second hit? Arthritis Rheum 2009; 60:185.Disclosure of Interests:None declared