Warrington, Kenneth J

ObjectiveTo compare patients with large‐vessel giant cell arteritis (LV‐GCA) characterized by wall thickening, stenosis, and/or occlusion of subclavian arteries to those with subclavian dilatation.MethodsFor the purposes of the present retrospective study, 2 different subsets of LV‐GCA were identified and compared from an established cohort of patients with radiographic evidence of subclavian artery vasculitis secondary to GCA: LV‐GCA with wall thickening, stenosis, and/or occlusion of subclavian arteries (Group 1), and LV‐GCA with dilatation of subclavian arteries without wall thickening or stenotic changes (Group 2).ResultsThe study included 109 patients in Group 1 and 11 in Group 2. Large‐vessel involvement secondary to GCA was diagnosed significantly later in patients from Group 2 compared to those from Group 1 (median 15.3 versus 0.0 months; P = 0.010). Compared to patients from Group 1, those from Group 2 were more frequently male (17% versus 45%; P = 0.027), ever smokers (42% versus 73%; P = 0.048), and more frequently had a history of coronary artery disease (11% versus 36%; P = 0.018). At LV‐GCA diagnosis, 10 of the 11 patients (91%) from Group 2 had aortic dilatation compared to 13 of 109 patients (12%) from Group 1 (P < 0.001). During the followup period, the prevalence of aortic aneurysm was significantly higher in patients from Group 2 compared with those from Group 1 (64% versus 7% at 5 years; P < 0.001).ConclusionTwo different subsets of LV‐GCA were identified. Given the strong association between subclavian artery dilatation and aortic aneurysm, such patients should be evaluated and monitored carefully for aortic dilatation.

ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of abatacept to that of placebo for the treatment of giant cell arteritis (GCA).MethodsIn this multicenter trial, patients with newly diagnosed or relapsing GCA were treated with abatacept 10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1, 15, and 29 and week 8, together with prednisone administered daily. At week 12, patients in remission underwent a double‐blinded randomization to continue to receive abatacept monthly or switch to placebo. Patients in both study arms received a standardized prednisone taper, with discontinuation of prednisone at week 28. All patients remained on their randomized assignment until meeting criteria for early termination or until 12 months after enrollment of the last patient. The primary end point was duration of remission (relapse‐free survival rate).ResultsForty‐nine eligible patients with GCA were enrolled and treated with prednisone and abatacept; of these, 41 reached the week 12 randomization and underwent a blinded randomization to receive abatacept or placebo. Prednisone was tapered using a standardized schedule, reaching a daily dosage of 20 mg at week 12 with discontinuation in all patients at week 28. The relapse‐free survival rate at 12 months was 48% for those receiving abatacept and 31% for those receiving placebo (P = 0.049). A longer median duration of remission was seen in those receiving abatacept compared to those receiving placebo (median duration 9.9 months versus 3.9 months; P = 0.023). There was no difference in the frequency or severity of adverse events, including infection, between the treatment arms.ConclusionIn patients with GCA, the addition of abatacept to a treatment regimen with prednisone reduced the risk of relapse and was not associated with a higher rate of toxicity compared to prednisone alone.

Objective To compare the efficacy of abatacept to that of placebo for the treatment of Takayasu arteritis (TAK). Methods In this multicenter trial, patients with newly diagnosed or relapsing TAK were treated with abatacept 10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1, 15, and 29 and week 8, together with prednisone administered daily. At week 12, patients in remission underwent a double‐blinded randomization to continue to receive abatacept monthly or switch to placebo. Patients in both study arms received a standardized prednisone taper, reaching a dosage of 20 mg daily at week 12, with discontinuation of prednisone at week 28. All patients remained on their randomized assignment until meeting criteria for early termination or until 12 months after enrollment of the last patient. The primary end point was duration of remission (relapse‐free survival). Results Thirty‐four eligible patients with TAK were enrolled and treated with prednisone and abatacept; of these, 26 reached the week 12 randomization and underwent a blinded randomization to receive either abatacept or placebo. The relapse‐free survival rate at 12 months was 22% for those receiving abatacept and 40% for those receiving placebo ( P = 0.853). Treatment with abatacept in patients with TAK enrolled in this study was not associated with a longer median duration of remission (median duration 5.5 months for abatacept versus 5.7 months for placebo). There was no difference in the frequency or severity of adverse events, including infection, between the treatment arms. Conclusion In patients with TAK, the addition of abatacept to a treatment regimen with prednisone did not reduce the risk of relapse.

Significance Antigen recognition by the immune system triggers rapid, specific, and protective responses, which are counterbalanced by inhibitory checkpoints to minimize potentially harmful immunity. The programmed death-1/ programmed death ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) checkpoint is overreactive in cancer patients, curbing antitumor immunity. Whether a failing PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint contributes to spontaneous autoimmune disease in humans is unknown. Here, we found that in patients with the autoimmune vasculitis giant cell arteritis, antigen-presenting cells provide insufficient negative signaling; unleashing highly activated T cells to infiltrate and damage the walls of large arteries. Thus, immunoinhibitory signals protect large arteries against inflammatory attack and checkpoint activation may be a suitable strategy to treat autoimmune vasculitis.

ObjectivePolyarteritis nodosa (PAN) is a systemic necrotizing vasculitis of medium‐sized visceral vessels. However, cutaneous arteritis (CA) and gastrointestinal (GI) vasculitis are forms of single‐organ vasculitis having indistinguishable histopathologic findings from PAN. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of patients with systemic PAN, CA, and GI vasculitis.MethodsRetrospective cohorts were assembled, consisting of patients with PAN, CA, and GI vasculitis between 1980 and 2014. The demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of patients were abstracted from medical records.ResultsWe included 48 patients with PAN, 41 patients with CA, and 19 patients with GI vasculitis. The disease of 1 patient evolved from CA to systemic PAN during the disease course. At diagnosis, 94% of patients with PAN, 93% of patients with CA, and 67% of patients with GI vasculitis were treated with glucocorticoids. Additional immunosuppressive agents were used in 67% of PAN, 37% of GI vasculitis, and 32% of CA cases. The 5‐year cumulative relapse rate was 45.2% in CA, and only 9.6% in PAN during a followup of approximately 6 years. No deaths were observed in the CA group. The survival rate at 10 years was 66% in the PAN group and 61% in the GI vasculitis group.ConclusionSystemic PAN, CA, and GI vasculitis take different clinical courses and therefore may be different diseases, rather than existing on a spectrum of the same disease. Progression of CA to systemic PAN is very rare. Relapse risk is low during followup in PAN. Patients with CA have a higher relapse rate than those with systemic PAN, possibly due to less use of immunosuppressive therapy in CA.

BackgroundFactors associated with dissection from inflammatory aortic aneurysms may be different from those in the general population.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the risk factors for aortic dissection/rupture in patients with giant cell arteritis (GCA) and aortic aneurysms.MethodsA population-based incident cohort of patients with a diagnosis of GCA from 1950 to 2004 was used. All patients with aortic aneurysms diagnosed 1 year prior to GCA diagnosis or any time thereafter were included. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate risk factors for aortic dissection/rupture.ResultsThe study included 33 patients (91% women) with GCA and aortic aneurysms. Mean age at diagnosis of aortic aneurysm was 83.6 years. There were 27 thoracic aneurysms and 19 abdominal aneurysms. Eight patients developed aortic dissection/rupture (both thoracic and abdominal aorta in 5 cases, thoracic aorta only in 2 cases, and isolated abdominal aorta in 1 case).Older age (hazard ratio [HR], 0.27 per 10 years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09–0.86) and later calendar year at diagnosis of aortic aneurysm (HR, 0.29 per 10 years; 95% CI, 0.13–0.69) were associated with decreased risk of dissection/rupture. Size of the thoracic aneurysm (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.69–1.99) was not associated with dissection/rupture. Histopathology showed active aortitis in 4 of 7 patients with aortic dissection/rupture compared with 0 of 7 patients with aortic aneurysm without dissection/rupture.ConclusionsAneurysm size was not a predictor of aortic dissection/rupture in this cohort of patients with GCA. The higher frequency of active aortitis in patients with dissection suggests that active inflammation may play a role.

AbstractMalignancy has a complicated association with immunoglobulin G4‐related disease (IgG4‐RD) both being an item in the differential diagnosis as well as malignancy occurring in the background of IgG4‐RD in the same organ. However, recently there is evidence of higher rates of distant malignancy in patients with IgG4‐RD. Here we report a case of pulmonary IgG4‐RD potentially consistent with a paraneoplastic phenomenon which improved with treatment of the underlying colon adenocarcinoma.