Comparative Efficacy of Immunosuppressive Therapies in the Treatment of Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis
Objectives The RESOLVE‐1 trial of lenabasum in diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (dcSSc) allowed background immunosuppressive therapy (IST) at the discretion of individual investigators, and no significant differences were observed between treatment arms. This provides a powerful opportunity to c...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2025-03-01
|
| Series: | ACR Open Rheumatology |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/acr2.70004 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849768429620297728 |
|---|---|
| author | Barbara White Daniel E. Furst Tracy M. Frech Masataka Kuwana Laura Hummers Wendy Stevens Suzanne Kafaja Eun Bong Lee Oliver Distler Dinesh Khanna Christopher P. Denton Robert Spiera for the RESOLVE‐1 investigators |
| author_facet | Barbara White Daniel E. Furst Tracy M. Frech Masataka Kuwana Laura Hummers Wendy Stevens Suzanne Kafaja Eun Bong Lee Oliver Distler Dinesh Khanna Christopher P. Denton Robert Spiera for the RESOLVE‐1 investigators |
| author_sort | Barbara White |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objectives The RESOLVE‐1 trial of lenabasum in diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (dcSSc) allowed background immunosuppressive therapy (IST) at the discretion of individual investigators, and no significant differences were observed between treatment arms. This provides a powerful opportunity to compare the relative efficacy of different ISTs in a well‐defined large cohort of patients with dcSSc. Methods Prespecified IST categories, efficacy end points, baseline disease characteristics likely to influence efficacy outcomes, the definition of interstitial lung disease, definitions of IST use, and categories of IST use by which efficacy outcomes were evaluated were. Descriptive statistics are used to present results. Results For skin, change in modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS) was numerically greatest with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) treatment in patients with the earliest disease, reaching −10.8 points in the MMF group versus −4.8 points in the no IST group in patients with a disease duration ≤2 years. Other ISTs had improvements intermediate between that seen in the MMF and no IST groups. Forced vital capacity (mL) was stable over 52 weeks in patients in the MMF group compared to an around 160‐mL decline over 52 weeks in no IST group. Differences in outcome were observed between antinuclear antibody subgroups, with greater difference in favor of MMF for skin and lungs being observed in anti–topoisomerase 1 autoantibody–positive patients. In contrast, anti–RNA polymerase III autoantibody–positive patients in both the no IST and MMF groups improved rapidly, with a decrease in mRSS. Conclusion Taken together, our findings robustly support routine use of MMF in dcSSc and show benefit especially in early‐stage disease. Those patients with high‐risk antibodies for lung fibrosis might be especially suitable for MMF treatment. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-c03aa9d584dd4db7860d35fe19b90512 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2578-5745 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-03-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | ACR Open Rheumatology |
| spelling | doaj-art-c03aa9d584dd4db7860d35fe19b905122025-08-20T03:03:49ZengWileyACR Open Rheumatology2578-57452025-03-0173n/an/a10.1002/acr2.70004Comparative Efficacy of Immunosuppressive Therapies in the Treatment of Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic SclerosisBarbara White0Daniel E. Furst1Tracy M. Frech2Masataka Kuwana3Laura Hummers4Wendy Stevens5Suzanne Kafaja6Eun Bong Lee7Oliver Distler8Dinesh Khanna9Christopher P. Denton10Robert Spiera11for the RESOLVE‐1 investigatorsCorbus Pharmaceuticals Holdings Inc, Norwood, Massachusetts, USA (current address: SFJ Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Pleasanton, California, USA)University of California Los AngelesVanderbilt University Nashville TennesseeNippon Medical School Tokyo JapanJohns Hopkins University Baltimore MarylandUniversity of Melbourne Melbourne Victoria AustraliaUniversity of California Los AngelesSeoul National University Seoul South KoreaUniversity Hospital Zürich Zürich SwitzerlandUniversity of Michigan Ann ArborUniversity College London London United KingdomHospital for Special Surgery New York New YorkObjectives The RESOLVE‐1 trial of lenabasum in diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (dcSSc) allowed background immunosuppressive therapy (IST) at the discretion of individual investigators, and no significant differences were observed between treatment arms. This provides a powerful opportunity to compare the relative efficacy of different ISTs in a well‐defined large cohort of patients with dcSSc. Methods Prespecified IST categories, efficacy end points, baseline disease characteristics likely to influence efficacy outcomes, the definition of interstitial lung disease, definitions of IST use, and categories of IST use by which efficacy outcomes were evaluated were. Descriptive statistics are used to present results. Results For skin, change in modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS) was numerically greatest with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) treatment in patients with the earliest disease, reaching −10.8 points in the MMF group versus −4.8 points in the no IST group in patients with a disease duration ≤2 years. Other ISTs had improvements intermediate between that seen in the MMF and no IST groups. Forced vital capacity (mL) was stable over 52 weeks in patients in the MMF group compared to an around 160‐mL decline over 52 weeks in no IST group. Differences in outcome were observed between antinuclear antibody subgroups, with greater difference in favor of MMF for skin and lungs being observed in anti–topoisomerase 1 autoantibody–positive patients. In contrast, anti–RNA polymerase III autoantibody–positive patients in both the no IST and MMF groups improved rapidly, with a decrease in mRSS. Conclusion Taken together, our findings robustly support routine use of MMF in dcSSc and show benefit especially in early‐stage disease. Those patients with high‐risk antibodies for lung fibrosis might be especially suitable for MMF treatment.https://doi.org/10.1002/acr2.70004 |
| spellingShingle | Barbara White Daniel E. Furst Tracy M. Frech Masataka Kuwana Laura Hummers Wendy Stevens Suzanne Kafaja Eun Bong Lee Oliver Distler Dinesh Khanna Christopher P. Denton Robert Spiera for the RESOLVE‐1 investigators Comparative Efficacy of Immunosuppressive Therapies in the Treatment of Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis ACR Open Rheumatology |
| title | Comparative Efficacy of Immunosuppressive Therapies in the Treatment of Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis |
| title_full | Comparative Efficacy of Immunosuppressive Therapies in the Treatment of Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis |
| title_fullStr | Comparative Efficacy of Immunosuppressive Therapies in the Treatment of Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Efficacy of Immunosuppressive Therapies in the Treatment of Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis |
| title_short | Comparative Efficacy of Immunosuppressive Therapies in the Treatment of Diffuse Cutaneous Systemic Sclerosis |
| title_sort | comparative efficacy of immunosuppressive therapies in the treatment of diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/acr2.70004 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT barbarawhite comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis AT danielefurst comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis AT tracymfrech comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis AT masatakakuwana comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis AT laurahummers comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis AT wendystevens comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis AT suzannekafaja comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis AT eunbonglee comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis AT oliverdistler comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis AT dineshkhanna comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis AT christopherpdenton comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis AT robertspiera comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis AT fortheresolve1investigators comparativeefficacyofimmunosuppressivetherapiesinthetreatmentofdiffusecutaneoussystemicsclerosis |