• Users Online: 100
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
TOPICAL REVIEW
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 12  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 48-51

New treatments for systemic lupus erythematosus


Department of Medicine, Newark Beth Israel Medical Center, Rutgers, The NJ Medical School, Newark, New Jersey, USA

Date of Web Publication23-Feb-2017

Correspondence Address:
Robert George Lahita
Rutgers, New Jersey Medical School, Newark, New Jersey
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/injr.injr_1_17

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

New therapies for systemic lupus erythematosus are rare. This is because of the complexity of the disease and its varied presentations. There are many variables and a variety of measurement scales that must be satisfied before a new agent is approved for use in humans. Attempts are ongoing to develop biological treatments for the disease using three approaches: B cell modulation, T cell regulation and cytokine inhibition. This paper reviews the current state of these three critical areas.

Keywords: B cells, cytokine manipulation, lupus treatments, T cells


How to cite this article:
Lahita RG. New treatments for systemic lupus erythematosus. Indian J Rheumatol 2017;12:48-51

How to cite this URL:
Lahita RG. New treatments for systemic lupus erythematosus. Indian J Rheumatol [serial online] 2017 [cited 2017 Jul 23];12:48-51. Available from: http://www.indianjrheumatol.com/text.asp?2017/12/1/48/200860

The morbidity and mortality in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) continues to be poor. The consistent uses of standard therapies such as corticosteroids and immunomodulators such as hydroxychloroquine, Imuran, cyclophosphamide, and mycophenolic acid have raised 10-year survival of this disease to >90%.[1] However, despite the use of these agents early, the morbidity of the disease in concert with the adverse effects of the available therapeutic agents is substantial. An example would be the use of prednisone where the side effects are daunting: Osteoporosis, avascular necrosis, and a 5 times greater increase of cardiac events than that seen with the general population. To obviate the adverse effects of many of these agents, there is emphasis on the development of targeted biologicals to treat SLE. To date, only one of these agents is approved for use in lupus; belimumab.[2],[3]

Every arm of the immune system is a possible target for therapeutic development in this disease; they include B-cells and T-cells, interferon (IFN), and cytokines. Both the innate and the adaptive immune systems are targets.

In the adaptive immune system, B-cells have captured the imagination of researchers. Clinical trials using rituximab, which targets CD20, resulted in an insignificant response to renal disease SLE [4] in both the Lupus Nephritis Assessment with Rituximab (LUNAR) Phase II and III and the Exploratory Phase II/III SLE Evaluation of Rituximab (EXPLORER) trials.[5],[6] Uncontrolled studies suggests that rituximab might have steroid-sparing effects in the treatment of lupus patients. In the “EXPLORER” trial, using British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) scores for the measurement of clinical activity in 257 British patients, the primary endpoints of this trial were not met; there was no difference between the placebo and treatment groups after 12 months. A pitfall could have been the use of daily oral prednisone based on BILAG scores which could have confounded the data.[5] The LUNAR trial looked at renal response, and again, there was no response between the placebo and drug groups.[6] However, again, steroids were used in the renal trial. Both of these trials highlight the difficulties of studying drugs in lupus patients.[7]

Ocrelizumab and epratuzumab are both anti-CD20 and anti-CD22 targeting therapies, respectively, and epratuzumab in the EMBODY I and II trial (Phase 3) showed no difference in disease improvement between drug and placebo.[8],[9],[10] Belimumab is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration as an agent directed to soluble B-lymphocyte-stimulating (BLYS) factor also known as B-cell activating factor (BAFF).[11],[12] Despite widespread use in nonrenal and noncentral nervous system, patients' results have been disappointing because there is an uneven response to the drug.[3],[12] An effort is underway to develop antisoluble and receptor bound BLYS soon. Tabalumab (an IgG4 monoclonal) neutralizes bound BAFF and the results so far have been modest.[13],[14] Blisibimod is a human peptibody, which also targets BAFF, and data on the effects of this agent are pending.[15] See [Table 1].[16]
Table 1: B-cell[16]

Click here to view


Because B-lymphocyte therapy is less successful for all patients with active SLE, T-cell therapies, anti-IFN, and cytokines seemed logical directions to pursue. T-cells enhance autoantibody production and promote B-cell differentiation, proliferation, and maturation. They also support class switching of antibodies. For those reasons, anti-CD40 ligand therapies were attempted to affect T-cell function in lupus patients; a strategy that could work. There were two major agents developed by two companies: BG9588, a humanized anti-CD40 L monoclonal,[17] and IDEC-131,[18] an anti-CD40 L molecule. Some of the data for the agents were promising because BG9588 showed a 50% reduction of proteinuria in two patients without worsening renal function. The drug inhibited both T-cell activation and T-cell-dependent B-cell activation. However, there were safety issues with BG9588 that was thromboembolic in nature. The other drug IDEC-131 showed no significant change in the SLEDAI-SELENA score for the treatment cohort. Another agent dapirolizumab pegol, an anti-CD40 L Fab fragment, showed good scores for the SLE responder index (SRI) and the BILAG assessment and results are also pending.

Another agent used in SLE is the co-stimulatory inhibitor abatacept normally of use in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), which is now being considered for the use in SLE.[19] CD28 with CD80/86 on B-cells is a second signal for T-cells, and three clinical trials showed some efficacy for abatacept in nonlife-threatening SLE. In one study of SLE nephritis, there were no significant differences between treatment arms. A Euro-lupus regimen that includes abatacept, high-dose oral prednisone, and IV cyclophosphamide in biopsy proven Grade III and IV glomerulonephritis did not achieve significance [Table 2].[20]
Table 2: New therapies for systemic lupus erythematosus T-cell[20]

Click here to view


T-cell proliferation has a role in the control of SLE because tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) showed higher rates of remission at 24 weeks, which was better than those on cyclophosphamide treatment.

T-reg cells are suppressive to autoreactive T-cells. T-reg survival and function depend on interleukin (IL-2). Lack of IL-2 results in suppression of activation-induced cell death and increased longevity of autoreactive T-cells in patients with SLE. IL-2 is necessary for T-cell activation and proliferation and the use of IL-2 inhibitors to subvert the continued presence of autoreactive T-cells seemed like a good plan of therapy.[21],[22] In fact, an open-label trial using this cytokine showed reduction in SELENA-SLEDAI score from a baseline value of 11 to 4 at week 12 and an 89.5% SRI response.

Another useful agent is leflunomide [23] which inhibits pyrimidine synthesis in T-cells and widely used in RA patients. When it is used with prednisone, it is as effective as cyclophosphamide in controlling SLE flares. MMF inhibits inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase for the synthesis of guanosine nucleotides. In certain ethnic groups like the African-American, this agent is better than cyclophosphamide.

A very viable target in SLE is IFN-alpha [24] and several IFN inhibitors have shown promise. Anifrolumab [25] is an anti-IFN-alpha receptor monoclonal antibody. Use of this antibody met its primary endpoints after 12 months of therapy (34–54.6 drug vs. 17% for placebo). As an integral part of the innate immune system, the downregulation of IFN-alpha may have great potential as a means of therapy.[26],[27],[28],[29] IFN-alpha or type 1 can break tolerance by activating antigen-presenting cells. Toll-like receptors 7 and 9 on B-cells and plasma dendritic cells (pDC) recognize self-nucleic acids and help produce tremendous amounts of IFN signature. Hydroxychloroquine and high-dose steroids (30 mg/kg/day for several days) have therapeutic effects by inhibiting pDC production of IFN. Realizing the potential of using IFN inhibitors, a variety of newer agents have been developed against INF: Rontalizumab (anti-IFN IgG1) which did not meet its primary endpoint and sifalimumab (IgG1 kappa) which also failed to meet its primary endpoint. However, anifrolumab (IgG1 kappa) studied in patients without lupus nephritis seemed to show some promise and has gone on to Phase III clinical studies.[25] See [Table 3].[30]
Table 3: Anticytokine[30]

Click here to view


Immunomodulatory peptides are of potential importance with regard to control of SLE.[31] The first of these is edratide which downregulates autoreactive T-cell responses to peripheral blood monocytes in SLE. Unfortunately, there seems to be no response in humans in contradistinction to data from mice. Another agent a P140 peptide known as rigerimod shows a good therapeutic response in human studies. Another agent laquinimod [32] showed promise by improving renal function when used in conjunction with MMF. Rapamycin or mammalian target of rapamycin (M-TOR) is a kinase [33] which regulates transmembrane potentials in patients with SLE and it and N-acetyl cysteine inhibits M-TOR in mice and works by enhancing apoptosis of autoreactive B-cells. We shall have to wait for more data before making claims of success in lupus.

Finding an appropriate therapy for a complex disease like Systemic Lupus Erythematosus is difficult. At issue is the nature of lupus itself, which is a disease of unyielding complexity involving more than the immune system and of course the complexities of the immune system itself with its many cytokines and effecctve cell populations and autoantiobdies. The disease presents in many ways and involves many organ systems, not just the immune system. It was once believed that SLE is more than one disease, depending on the organs involved. A clinical researcher tries to quantify changes of the clinical activity in the context of a stochastic immune system in the face of other immunomodulators. These all highlight the fact that the etiology of SLE, which remains to be fully elucidated, is perhaps the biggest stumbling block in the new drug development for SLE.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
  References Top

1.
Borchers AT, Keen CL, Shoenfeld Y, Gershwin ME. Surviving the butterfly and the wolf: Mortality trends in systemic lupus erythematosus. Autoimmun Rev 2004;3:423-53.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Askanase AD, Yazdany J, Molta CT. Post-marketing experiences with belimumab in the treatment of SLE patients. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 2014;40:507-17, viii.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Shum K, Askanase A. Belimumab and the clinical data. Curr Rheumatol Rep 2012;14:310-7.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Merrill JT, Neuwelt CM, Wallace DJ, Shanahan JC, Latinis KM, Oates JC, et al. Efficacy and safety of rituximab in moderately-to-severely active systemic lupus erythematosus: The randomized, double-blind, phase II/III systemic lupus erythematosus evaluation of rituximab trial. Arthritis Rheum 2010;62:222-33.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Jónsdóttir T, Zickert A, Sundelin B, Henriksson EW, van Vollenhoven RF, Gunnarsson I. Long-term follow-up in lupus nephritis patients treated with rituximab – Clinical and histopathological response. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2013;52:847-55.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Jónsdóttir T, Sundelin B, Welin Henriksson E, van Vollenhoven RF, Gunnarsson I. Rituximab-treated membranous lupus nephritis: Clinical outcome and effects on electron dense deposits. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:1172-3.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Kamal A, Khamashta M. The efficacy of novel B cell biologics as the future of SLE treatment: A review. Autoimmun Rev 2014;13:1094-101.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Clowse ME, Wallace DJ, Furie RA, Petri MA, Pike MC, Leszczynski P, et al. Efficacy and safety of epratuzumab in moderately to severely active systemic lupus erythematosus: Results from the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, EMBODY™ 1 and EMBODY™ 2. Arthritis Rheumatol 2016;(2):362-75.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Dörner T, Kaufmann J, Wegener WA, Teoh N, Goldenberg DM, Burmester GR. Initial clinical trial of epratuzumab (humanized anti-CD22 antibody) for immunotherapy of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Res Ther 2006;8:R74.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Wallace DJ, Gordon C, Strand V, Hobbs K, Petri M, Kalunian K, et al. Efficacy and safety of epratuzumab in patients with moderate/severe flaring systemic lupus erythematosus: Results from two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre studies (ALLEVIATE) and follow-up. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2013;52:1313-22.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Jacob CO, Yu N, Sindhava V, Cancro MP, Pawar RD, Putterman C, et al. Differential development of systemic lupus erythematosus in NZM 2328 mice deficient in discrete pairs of BAFF receptors. Arthritis Rheumatol 2015;67:2523-35.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Hui-Yuen JS, Reddy A, Taylor J, Li X, Eichenfield AH, Bermudez LM, et al. Safety and efficacy of belimumab to treat systemic lupus erythematosus in academic clinical practices. J Rheumatol 2015;42:2288-95.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Isenberg DA, Petri M, Kalunian K, Tanaka Y, Urowitz MB, Hoffman RW, et al. Efficacy and safety of subcutaneous tabalumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: Results from ILLUMINATE-1, a 52-week, phase III, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75:323-31.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Merrill JT, van Vollenhoven RF, Buyon JP, Furie RA, Stohl W, Morgan-Cox M, et al. Efficacy and safety of subcutaneous tabalumab, a monoclonal antibody to B-cell activating factor, in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: Results from ILLUMINATE-2, a 52-week, phase III, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75:332-40.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Stohl W, Merrill JT, Looney RJ, Buyon J, Wallace DJ, Weisman MH, et al. Treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus patients with the BAFF antagonist “peptibody” blisibimod (AMG 623/A-623): Results from randomized, double-blind phase 1a and phase 1b trials. Arthritis Res Ther 2015;17:215.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Hui-Yuen JS, Nguyen SC, Askanase AD. Targeted B cell therapies in the treatment of adult and pediatric systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus 2016;25:1086-96.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Boumpas DT, Furie R, Manzi S, Illei GG, Wallace DJ, Balow JE, et al. A short course of BG9588 (anti-CD40 ligand antibody) improves serologic activity and decreases hematuria in patients with proliferative lupus glomerulonephritis. Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:719-27.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Kalunian KC, Davis JC Jr., Merrill JT, Totoritis MC, Wofsy D; IDEC- Lupus Study Group. Treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus by inhibition of T cell costimulation with anti-CD154: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 2002;46:3251-8.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
McCoy KD, Le Gros G. The role of CTLA-4 in the regulation of T cell immune responses. Immunol Cell Biol 1999;77:1-10.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Nandkumar P, Furie R. T-cell-directed therapies in systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus 2016;25:1080-5.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Mak A, Kow NY. The pathology of T cells in systemic lupus erythematosus. J Immunol Res 2014;2014:419029.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Lo MS, Tsokos GC. Treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus: New advances in targeted therapy. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2012;1247:138-52.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Chong AS, Rezai K, Gebel HM, Finnegan A, Foster P, Xu X, et al. Effects of leflunomide and other immunosuppressive agents on T cell proliferation in vitro. Transplantation 1996;61:140-5.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Elkon KB, Stone VV. Type I interferon and systemic lupus erythematosus. J Interferon Cytokine Res 2011;31:803-12.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Peng L, Oganesyan V, Wu H, Dall'Acqua WF, Damschroder MM. Molecular basis for antagonistic activity of anifrolumab, an anti-interferon-a receptor 1 antibody. MAbs 2015;7:428-39.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Crow MK. Autoimmunity: Interferon α or ß: which is the culprit in autoimmune disease? Nat Rev Rheumatol 2016;12:439-40.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Crow MK. Interferon-alpha: A therapeutic target in systemic lupus erythematosus. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 2010;36:173-86, x.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Crow MK, Olferiev M, Kirou KA. Targeting of type I interferon in systemic autoimmune diseases. Transl Res 2015;165:296-305.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Crow MK. Type I interferon in organ-targeted autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. Arthritis Res Ther 2010;12 Suppl 1:S5.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Kalunian KC. Interferon-targeted therapy in systemic lupus erythematosus: Is this an alternative to targeting B and T cells? Lupus 2016;25:1097-101.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Sthoeger ZM, Dayan M, Tcherniack A, Green L, Toledo S, Segal R, et al. Modulation of autoreactive responses of peripheral blood lymphocytes of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus by peptides based on human and murine anti-DNA autoantibodies. Clin Exp Immunol 2003;131:385-92.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Lourenço EV, Wong M, Hahn BH, Palma-Diaz MF, Skaggs BJ. Laquinimod delays and suppresses nephritis in lupus-prone mice and affects both myeloid and lymphoid immune cells. Arthritis Rheumatol 2014;66:674-85.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
O'Loghlen A, Pérez-Morgado MI, Salinas M, Martín ME. N-acetyl-cysteine abolishes hydrogen peroxide-induced modification of eukaryotic initiation factor 4F activity via distinct signalling pathways. Cell Signal 2006;18:21-31.  Back to cited text no. 33
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
References
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed988    
    Printed5    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded176    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]