Canny S and Mellins E. New frontiers in the treatment of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2017, 6(F1000 Faculty Rev):971 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11327.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
1Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA 2Department of Pediatrics, Program in Immunology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS
Abstract
Systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA) and its most significant complication, macrophage activation syndrome (MAS), have traditionally been treated with steroids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications. However, the introduction of biologic medications that inhibit specific cytokines, such interleukins 1 and 6, has changed the treatment paradigm for sJIA patients. In this review, we discuss the therapies currently used in the treatment of sJIA as well as novel targets and approaches under consideration, including mesenchymal stromal cell therapy and JAK inhibitors. We also discuss targeting cytokines that have been implicated in MAS, such as interferon gamma and interleukin 18.
Corresponding authors:
Susan Canny, Elizabeth Mellins
Competing interests:
Elizabeth Mellins receives sponsored research funding from Novartis. Susan Canny declares that she has no competing interests.
Grant information:
This work was supported by the Systemic JIA Foundation (to EM) and the University of California at San Francisco-Stanford Arthritis Center of Excellence, funded by the Great Western Region of the Arthritis Foundation (to EM).
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA) is classified as a subtype of JIA, although it is increasingly recognized as a distinct disease1–4. The ILAR classification criteria defines sJIA as arthritis in one or more joints, accompanied or preceded by systemic symptoms including quotidian fever of at least 2 weeks’ duration, an erythematous rash, lymphadenopathy, hepatomegaly, and splenomegaly and/or serositis but not associated with another diagnosis such as psoriasis, human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-B27 arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, ankylosing spondylitis, or the presence of immunoglobulin (Ig) M rheumatoid factor5. Estimates for the prevalence of JIA range from 16 to 400 cases per 100,000 children6, with sJIA accounting for 4–17% of all JIA cases6.
A proportion of children with sJIA will develop macrophage activation syndrome (MAS), with 10% developing an overt and potentially fatal clinical disease and 30–50% having occult MAS7–10. MAS is a form of secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) and accounts for the majority of the mortality associated with sJIA1,9. In 2016, new classification criteria for MAS in sJIA were defined, based on expert consensus and patient data, to classify patients for research studies. To be classified as having MAS, a patient must be febrile with a known or suspected diagnosis of sJIA and have a ferritin level greater than 684 ng/mL in addition to two of the following: platelet count ≤181 × 109/L, aspartate aminotransferase (AST) >48 units/L, triglycerides >156 mg/dL, and/or fibrinogen ≤360 mg/dL11,12.
sJIA can proceed with a monophasic, polycyclic (periods of flare separated by periods of remission), or persistent course of disease1,13. When remission is defined as inactive disease off medications for at least 3 months, most patients will have either a monophasic or a persistent disease course. In one prospective cohort study, 42.2% of patients had a monophasic course, 6.7% of patients had a polycyclic course, and 51.1% of patients had persistent disease13. Features associated with persistent disease include polyarticular arthritis early in disease and persistence of disease activity (specifically arthritis, elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR], and use of corticosteroids) at 3 and 6 months13. Persistent disease can be further subdivided into either predominately systemic or arthritic disease. Children with sJIA who develop persistent arthritis only (often referred to as systemic onset, polyarticular course) may represent a distinct subtype of sJIA and may benefit from distinct treatment approaches14. In a recent cross-sectional analysis of North American sJIA patients, this subtype typically had more functional disability, despite a shorter time to diagnosis, and had longer disease duration, consistent with the possibility that, in some patients, sJIA evolves into this phenotype over time14.
Recent data from a genome-wide association study of sJIA suggest that sJIA has a genetic architecture that is distinct from other forms of JIA2. Whereas other subtypes of JIA have features of classic autoimmune diseases, sJIA may be better described as sharing features of both autoinflammatory and autoimmune diseases1,15–17. Autoinflammatory diseases are mediated by cells of the innate immune system and inflammatory cytokines, such as interleukin (IL)-1 and IL-6, in contrast to the classical autoimmune diseases, which are mediated by cells of the adaptive immune system and are frequently found to be associated with specific HLA alleles15,18. Several studies suggest a role for natural killer (NK) cells, part of the innate immune system, in sJIA, particularly during MAS19–24. In the most recent study, analysis of RNA sequencing data from sJIA NK cells revealed an enrichment of inflammatory pathways with downregulation of IL-10 receptor A and granzyme K23.
A recent study by Ombrello et al. described an HLA gene association (HLA-DRB1*11) with sJIA16. Class II major histocompatibility complex (MHC) molecules are expressed on professional antigen-presenting cells and interact with CD4+ T cells via the αβ T cell receptor, but these molecules may also play a role in the regulation of innate responses25,26. As the authors note, the HLA association may reflect a contribution to sJIA pathogenesis via CD4+ T cells and/or via “dysregulation of innate immunity”16. Nigrovic has proposed a biphasic model of sJIA in which innate immune factors dominate the initial disease presentation, whereas adaptive immune components, such as a skewing of the CD4+ T cell population to favor Th17 over regulatory T cell development, contribute in those patients in whom chronic arthritis develops17. The possibility that acute systemic disease is dominated by innate factors and chronic arthritis is dominated by adaptive immune factors suggests that different treatment approaches may be warranted in different phases of disease17.
Treatment
Traditionally, sJIA has been treated with a combination of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications, such as indomethacin, and steroids. In the pre-biologic era, studies of long-term outcome reported 40–50% of sJIA patients followed for at least 10 years still had active disease27. Data on the efficacy of high-dose intravenous Ig (IVIG) are conflicting28,29. In practice, IVIG was often tried because of lack of steroid response or steroid toxicity, but, currently, IVIG is used less often30. Methotrexate, a first-line treatment in other subtypes of JIA, has also been used for sJIA. Indeed, current recommendations from the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) include methotrexate as an option for sJIA patients with persistent arthritis30. The only randomized, placebo-controlled trial of (low-dose, oral) methotrexate evaluated a group of children with persistent arthritis for >1 year, many of whom also had signs of active systemic disease. The trial did not demonstrate a significant difference between methotrexate and placebo in joint scores or systemic features, suggesting that its utility in sJIA may be limited31.
The advent of biologic medications has provided new avenues for the treatment of sJIA and options for steroid-sparing therapies3. Several studies have demonstrated the efficacy of inhibitors of the inflammatory cytokines IL-1 and IL-63,32–37. Trials of canakinumab, a monoclonal antibody to IL-1β, and tocilizumab, a monoclonal antibody to the IL-6 receptor, showed significant clinical improvement in patients treated with these medications32,33. A total of 84% of patients treated with canakinumab demonstrated clinical response compared to 10% in the placebo group33. Similarly, 85% of patients treated with tocilizumab had clinical improvement compared to 24% in the placebo group32. Several recent reviews nicely present further details of therapies that inhibit IL-1 and IL-638,39. Increased susceptibility to infections is observed in patients treated with these medications32,33,40. The most common reported infections include nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infections, bronchitis, and gastroenteritis, although serious bacterial infections including pneumonia and sepsis in addition to rare cases of herpesvirus infections including varicella, herpes zoster, cytomegalovirus, and Epstein-Barr virus have been reported32,33,37,40–43.
The facts that some patients respond to biologics and others do not and that the latter group may be enriched for those with long-standing disease have given rise to a hypothesis that there is a “window of opportunity” for treatment, i.e. if patients are treated early with agents that block IL-1 or IL-6, this may modulate the course of their disease17,37,44,45. In an uncontrolled trial of anakinra (IL-1 receptor antagonist) as first-line therapy in 20 steroid-naïve patients, >80% developed inactive disease, either on or off medication, that persisted over a mean follow-up of >2 years44. However, the fraction of these patients with monocyclic disease that would have remitted without biologic therapy is not known. Currently, it remains uncertain whether there is truly a window of opportunity or a subset of patients in whom such treatments are effective.
Although many patients respond to IL-1 and IL-6 inhibition, a subset of patients continues to have refractory sJIA. Nearly one-third of patients develop persistent polyarthritis after resolution of the systemic symptoms14. For these patients, medications including abatacept, a CTLA-4 fusion protein that blocks T cell co-stimulation via CD80/CD86, have demonstrated some efficacy46,47. Several sJIA patients with refractory disease, including some with persistent arthritis, were treated with abatacept in combination with anakinra with clinical improvement and ability to reduce doses of anakinra and steroids47. The fact that abatacept, which blocks T cell activation, is effective in some refractory sJIA cases suggests new therapeutic targets for these patients and a possible role for T cells in refractory disease.
There is no current consensus on the optimal way to treat recurrent MAS in sJIA. A range of approaches is used from a combination of steroids, IL-1 inhibitors, and cyclosporine to etoposide with steroids (based on HLH treatment protocols) to stem cell transplantation. Treatment protocols for HLH developed by the Histiocyte Society include etoposide and steroids with or without cyclosporine and intrathecal methotrexate and steroids followed by bone marrow transplantation for patients with familial HLH or refractory secondary HLH48–51. In patients with sJIA, the emphasis typically has been on controlling the underlying disease48. However, it is worth noting that MAS, triggered by infections, occurs even when patients’ underlying sJIA is controlled42. As discussed below, new approaches may hold promise for the treatment of refractory MAS, given their efficacy in animal models of HLH.
Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has been used to treat severe refractory sJIA52–54. Following several deaths in transplant patients due to virally induced MAS, investigators aimed to achieve improved control of disease prior to transplantation; the conditioning protocol was amended to mitigate T cell depletion, and patients were placed on antiviral prophylaxis after transplantation52. Data suggest that HSCT allows for a resetting of the immune regulatory network with a recovery of regulatory T cells55.
On the horizon
Given the risks associated with HSCT and the advent of biologic medications, the use of allogeneic stem cell transplants in sJIA has declined56. Investigators are now exploring the possibility of multipotent mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC) therapy as an alternative for the treatment of autoimmune diseases refractory to other treatments. Studies have shown that MSCs have immunomodulatory properties and are well tolerated56–59. In 10 patients with JIA treated with MSCs, markers of inflammation (ESR and C-reactive protein [CRP]) were significantly decreased and regulatory T cells were significantly increased60. Additional larger studies are warranted.
Evidence suggests that the cytokine interferon gamma (IFNγ) plays an important role specifically in MAS38,61,62. Levels of IFNγ and IFNγ-induced genes are not elevated in patients with sJIA without signs of MAS63–65. In contrast, in patients with sJIA complicated by MAS, IFNγ levels and IFNγ-induced gene expression increase61,62. A phase II/III trial is currently underway to assess the efficacy of an anti-IFNγ monoclonal antibody in primary HLH. Based on the evidence for a role for IFNγ in MAS, targeting IFNγ in secondary HLH may also prove fruitful.
The cytokine IL-18 is another potential target in sJIA, as studies have shown that patients with sJIA have high levels of IL-18 and substantially increased levels may be associated with risk of MAS66–70. The IL-18 binding protein (IL-18BP) regulates IL-18 action; it binds IL-18 with high affinity and inhibits its activity71. Administration of synthetic IL-18BP in a mouse model of HLH (perforin-1-knockout mice infected with murine cytomegalovirus) diminished liver and spleen damage and reduced levels of the inflammatory cytokines IFNγ and TNFα, although it did not alter survival72. Notably, elevated levels of IL-18 persist for at least a few months in clinical remission of sJIA66,67, suggesting that further research is needed to clarify the role of IL-18 in disease pathogenesis and control of disease. A recent case report has demonstrated the potential utility of recombinant IL-18BP in a patient with an MAS-like syndrome due to mutation of NLRC4, a protein that triggers activation of the inflammasome73. Whether IL-18BP will be effective clinically in sJIA or MAS remains to be seen and, if so, whether the timing of administration determines clinical response.
Another possible cytokine target is IL-17. As noted above, Th17 cells have been proposed to play a pathogenic role in the chronic arthritic phase of sJIA17. IL-17-producing T cells (CD4+ and CD4–) have been found at higher proportions in the peripheral blood of sJIA patients compared to healthy, age-matched controls74. Biologic agents modulating the action of IL-17 are in various stages of investigation in the treatment of psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and rheumatoid arthritis75 and may be worth considering in the treatment of sJIA patients with chronic arthritis.
Cytokines signal through their cell surface receptors to induce changes in gene transcription. Signaling molecules include the enzymes in the Janus kinase (JAK) family. New small molecule inhibitors of JAKs are under development. Tofacitinib, an inhibitor of JAK1 and JAK3, has been found to be effective in adults with rheumatoid arthritis76. Varicella zoster virus reactivation and cytomegalovirus infection have been reported in patients on tofacitinib, although no cases of Epstein-Barr virus, a common MAS trigger, have been reported77,78. Given the association of viral triggers with MAS, JAK inhibitors, at least tofacitinib, may be less attractive as therapeutic options in patients at risk of developing MAS20,42,79,80. In contrast, ruxolitinib, an inhibitor of JAK1 and JAK2, has been tested in mouse models of HLH and found to promote survival and reduce levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines IL-6 and TNFα81,82, suggesting that JAK1/2 may be a therapeutic target in patients with HLH. Whether these small molecule JAK inhibitors will be effective in sJIA or MAS in children requires further study.
Given the small numbers of patients with sJIA, collaborative research and research networks, such as the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA), the Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation (PRINTO), and the Pediatric Rheumatology Collaborative Study Group (PRCSG), will likely play an important role in developing the next generation of sJIA treatments. CARRA has developed consensus treatment plans for sJIA to be used in comparative efficacy trials of different treatments83,84. The ACR has recently developed comprehensive guidelines for the treatment of sJIA based on disease activity and disease phenotype30. Understanding the pathogenesis of sJIA and its complications, including MAS and refractory arthritis, will be important in defining new therapeutic targets and ensuring that clinical treatments optimize therapeutic outcomes while minimizing treatment toxicities.
Competing interests
Elizabeth Mellins receives sponsored research funding from Novartis. Susan Canny declares that she has no competing interests.
Grant information
This work was supported by the Systemic JIA Foundation (to EM) and the University of California at San Francisco-Stanford Arthritis Center of Excellence, funded by the Great Western Region of the Arthritis Foundation (to EM).
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Drs. Alexei Grom and Randy Cron for critical reading of the manuscript.
2.
Ombrello MJ, Arthur VL, Remmers EF, et al.:
Genetic architecture distinguishes systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis from other forms of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: clinical and therapeutic implications.
Ann Rheum Dis.
2017; 76(5): 906–13. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
3.
Sandborg C, Mellins ED:
A new era in the treatment of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
N Engl J Med.
2012; 367(25): 2439–40. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
4.
Woo P:
Systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: diagnosis, management, and outcome.
Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol.
2006; 2(1): 28–34. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
5.
Petty RE, Southwood TR, Manners P, et al.:
International League of Associations for Rheumatology classification of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: second revision, Edmonton, 2001.
J Rheumatol.
2004; 31(2): 390–2. PubMed Abstract
8.
Behrens EM, Beukelman T, Paessler M, et al.:
Occult macrophage activation syndrome in patients with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
J Rheumatol.
2007; 34(5): 1133–8. PubMed Abstract
9.
Minoia F, Davì S, Horne A, et al.:
Clinical features, treatment, and outcome of macrophage activation syndrome complicating systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a multinational, multicenter study of 362 patients.
Arthritis Rheumatol.
2014; 66(11): 3160–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
10.
Sawhney S, Woo P, Murray KJ:
Macrophage activation syndrome: a potentially fatal complication of rheumatic disorders.
Arch Dis Child.
2001; 85(5): 421–6. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
11.
Ravelli A, Minoia F, Davi S, et al.:
2016 Classification Criteria for Macrophage Activation Syndrome Complicating Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: A European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology/Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation Collaborative Initiative.
Arthritis Rheumatol.
2016; 68(3): 566–76. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
12.
Ravelli A, Minoia F, Davi S, et al.:
2016 Classification Criteria for Macrophage Activation Syndrome Complicating Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: A European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology/Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation Collaborative Initiative.
Ann Rheum Dis.
2016; 75(3): 481–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
13.
Singh-Grewal D, Schneider R, Bayer N, et al.:
Predictors of disease course and remission in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: significance of early clinical and laboratory features.
Arthritis Rheum.
2006; 54(5): 1595–601. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
14.
Janow G, Schanberg LE, Setoguchi S, et al.:
The Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Cohort of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Registry: 2010-2013.
J Rheumatol.
2016; 43(9): 1755–62. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
15.
McGonagle D, Aziz A, Dickie LJ, et al.:
An integrated classification of pediatric inflammatory diseases, based on the concepts of autoinflammation and the immunological disease continuum.
Pediatr Res.
2009; 65(5 Pt 2): 38R–45R. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
16.
Ombrello MJ, Remmers EF, Tachmazidou I, et al.:
HLA-DRB1*11 and variants of the MHC class II locus are strong risk factors for systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.
2015; 112(52): 15970–5. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
17.
Nigrovic PA:
Review: is there a window of opportunity for treatment of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis?
Arthritis Rheumatol.
2014; 66(6): 1405–13. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
19.
Villanueva J, Lee S, Giannini EH, et al.:
Natural killer cell dysfunction is a distinguishing feature of systemic onset juvenile rheumatoid arthritis and macrophage activation syndrome.
Arthritis Res Ther.
2005; 7(1): R30–7. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
20.
Grom AA, Villanueva J, Lee S, et al.:
Natural killer cell dysfunction in patients with systemic-onset juvenile rheumatoid arthritis and macrophage activation syndrome.
J Pediatr.
2003; 142(3): 292–6. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
21.
Avau A, Put K, Wouters CH, et al.:
Cytokine balance and cytokine-driven natural killer cell dysfunction in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Cytokine Growth Factor Rev.
2015; 26(1): 35–45. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
22.
Zhou J, Tang X, Ding Y, et al.:
Natural killer cell activity and frequency of killer cell immunoglobulin-like receptors in children with different forms of juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Pediatr Allergy Immunol.
2013; 24(7): 691–6. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
23.
Put K, Vandenhaute J, Avau A, et al.:
Inflammatory Gene Expression Profile and Defective Interferon-γ and Granzyme K in Natural Killer Cells From Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Patients.
Arthritis Rheumatol.
2017; 69(1): 213–24. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
24.
de Jager W, Vastert SJ, Beekman JM, et al.:
Defective phosphorylation of interleukin-18 receptor beta causes impaired natural killer cell function in systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Arthritis Rheum.
2009; 60(9): 2782–93. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
25.
Jones EY, Fugger L, Strominger JL, et al.:
MHC class II proteins and disease: a structural perspective.
Nat Rev Immunol.
2006; 6(4): 271–82. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
26.
Liu X, Zhan Z, Li D, et al.:
Intracellular MHC class II molecules promote TLR-triggered innate immune responses by maintaining activation of the kinase Btk.
Nat Immunol.
2011; 12(5): 416–24. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
27.
Wallace CA, Levinson JE:
Juvenile rheumatoid arthritis: outcome and treatment for the 1990s.
Rheum Dis Clin North Am.
1991; 17(4): 891–905. PubMed Abstract
28.
Silverman ED, Laxer RM, Greenwald M, et al.:
Intravenous gamma globulin therapy in systemic juvenile rheumatoid arthritis.
Arthritis Rheum.
1990; 33(7): 1015–22. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
29.
Silverman ED, Cawkwell GD, Lovell DJ, et al.:
Intravenous immunoglobulin in the treatment of systemic juvenile rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized placebo controlled trial. Pediatric Rheumatology Collaborative Study Group.
J Rheumatol.
1994; 21(12): 2353–8. PubMed Abstract
30.
Ringold S, Weiss PF, Beukelman T, et al.:
2013 update of the 2011 American College of Rheumatology recommendations for the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: recommendations for the medical therapy of children with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis and tuberculosis screening among children receiving biologic medications.
Arthritis Rheum.
2013; 65(10): 2499–512. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
31.
Woo P, Southwood TR, Prieur AM, et al.:
Randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover trial of low-dose oral methotrexate in children with extended oligoarticular or systemic arthritis.
Arthritis Rheum.
2000; 43(8): 1849–57. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
32.
De Benedetti F, Brunner HI, Ruperto N, et al.:
Randomized trial of tocilizumab in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
N Engl J Med.
2012; 367(25): 2385–95. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
33.
Ruperto N, Brunner HI, Quartier P, et al.:
Two randomized trials of canakinumab in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
N Engl J Med.
2012; 367(25): 2396–406. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
34.
Pascual V, Allantaz F, Arce E, et al.:
Role of interleukin-1 (IL-1) in the pathogenesis of systemic onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis and clinical response to IL-1 blockade.
J Exp Med.
2005; 201(9): 1479–86. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
35.
Verbsky JW, White AJ:
Effective use of the recombinant interleukin 1 receptor antagonist anakinra in therapy resistant systemic onset juvenile rheumatoid arthritis.
J Rheumatol.
2004; 31(10): 2071–5. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
36.
Yokota S, Miyamae T, Imagawa T, et al.:
Therapeutic efficacy of humanized recombinant anti-interleukin-6 receptor antibody in children with systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Arthritis Rheum.
2005; 52(3): 818–25. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
37.
Nigrovic PA, Mannion M, Prince FH, et al.:
Anakinra as first-line disease-modifying therapy in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: report of forty-six patients from an international multicenter series.
Arthritis Rheum.
2011; 63(2): 545–55. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
40.
Yokota S, Imagawa T, Mori M, et al.:
Longterm safety and effectiveness of the anti-interleukin 6 receptor monoclonal antibody tocilizumab in patients with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis in Japan.
J Rheumatol.
2014; 41(4): 759–67. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
41.
Yokota S, Itoh Y, Morio T, et al.:
Tocilizumab in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis in a real-world clinical setting: results from 1 year of postmarketing surveillance follow-up of 417 patients in Japan.
Ann Rheum Dis.
2016; 75(9): 1654–60. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
42.
Grom AA, Ilowite NT, Pascual V, et al.:
Rate and Clinical Presentation of Macrophage Activation Syndrome in Patients With Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Treated With Canakinumab.
Arthritis Rheumatol.
2016; 68(1): 218–28. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
43.
Ilowite NT, Prather K, Lokhnygina Y, et al.:
Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the efficacy and safety of rilonacept in the treatment of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Arthritis Rheumatol.
2014; 66(9): 2570–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
44.
Vastert SJ, de Jager W, Noordman BJ, et al.:
Effectiveness of first-line treatment with recombinant interleukin-1 receptor antagonist in steroid-naive patients with new-onset systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results of a prospective cohort study.
Arthritis Rheumatol.
2014; 66(4): 1034–43. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
45.
Otten MH, Anink J, Prince FH, et al.:
Trends in prescription of biological agents and outcomes of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results of the Dutch national Arthritis and Biologics in Children Register.
Ann Rheum Dis.
2015; 74(7): 1379–86. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
46.
Ruperto N, Lovell DJ, Quartier P, et al.:
Long-term safety and efficacy of abatacept in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Arthritis Rheum.
2010; 62(6): 1792–802. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
47.
Record JL, Beukelman T, Cron RQ:
Combination therapy of abatacept and anakinra in children with refractory systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a retrospective case series.
J Rheumatol.
2011; 38(1): 180–1. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
49.
Henter JI, Aricò M, Egeler RM, et al.:
HLH-94: a treatment protocol for hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. HLH study Group of the Histiocyte Society.
Med Pediatr Oncol.
1997; 28(5): 342–7. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
50.
Henter J, Horne A, Aricó M, et al.:
HLH-2004: Diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines for hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis.
Pediatr Blood Cancer.
2007; 48(2): 124–31. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
51.
Henter JI, Samuelsson-Horne A, Aricò M, et al.:
Treatment of hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis with HLH-94 immunochemotherapy and bone marrow transplantation.
Blood.
2002; 100(7): 2367–73. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
52.
Brinkman DM, de Kleer IM, ten Cate R, et al.:
Autologous stem cell transplantation in children with severe progressive systemic or polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis: long-term follow-up of a prospective clinical trial.
Arthritis Rheum.
2007; 56(7): 2410–21. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
53.
Wulffraat NM, Brinkman D, Ferster A, et al.:
Long-term follow-up of autologous stem cell transplantation for refractory juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Bone Marrow Transplant.
2003; 32(Suppl 1): S61–4. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
54.
De Kleer IM, Brinkman DM, Ferster A, et al.:
Autologous stem cell transplantation for refractory juvenile idiopathic arthritis: analysis of clinical effects, mortality, and transplant related morbidity.
Ann Rheum Dis.
2004; 63(10): 1318–26. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
55.
de Kleer I, Vastert B, Klein M, et al.:
Autologous stem cell transplantation for autoimmunity induces immunologic self-tolerance by reprogramming autoreactive T cells and restoring the CD4+CD25+ immune regulatory network.
Blood.
2006; 107(4): 1696–702. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
57.
Swart JF, Wulffraat NM:
Mesenchymal stromal cells for treatment of arthritis.
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol.
2014; 28(4): 589–603. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
59.
Wang L, Wang L, Cong X, et al.:
Human umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell therapy for patients with active rheumatoid arthritis: safety and efficacy.
Stem Cells Dev.
2013; 22(24): 3192–202. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
61.
Bracaglia C, de Graaf K, Pires Marafon D, et al.:
Elevated circulating levels of interferon-γ and interferon-γ-induced chemokines characterise patients with macrophage activation syndrome complicating systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Ann Rheum Dis.
2017; 76(1): 166–72. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
62.
Put K, Avau A, Brisse E, et al.:
Cytokines in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis and haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis: tipping the balance between interleukin-18 and interferon-γ.
Rheumatology (Oxford).
2015; 54(8): 1507–17. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
63.
Sikora KA, Fall N, Thornton S, et al.:
The limited role of interferon-γ in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis cannot be explained by cellular hyporesponsiveness.
Arthritis Rheum.
2012; 64(11): 3799–808. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
64.
Fall N, Barnes M, Thornton S, et al.:
Gene expression profiling of peripheral blood from patients with untreated new-onset systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis reveals molecular heterogeneity that may predict macrophage activation syndrome.
Arthritis Rheum.
2007; 56(11): 3793–804. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
65.
Ogilvie EM, Khan A, Hubank M, et al.:
Specific gene expression profiles in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Arthritis Rheum.
2007; 56(6): 1954–65. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
66.
Shimizu M, Nakagishi Y, Kasai K, et al.:
Tocilizumab masks the clinical symptoms of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis-associated macrophage activation syndrome: the diagnostic significance of interleukin-18 and interleukin-6.
Cytokine.
2012; 58(2): 287–94. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
67.
Shimizu M, Yokoyama T, Yamada K, et al.:
Distinct cytokine profiles of systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis-associated macrophage activation syndrome with particular emphasis on the role of interleukin-18 in its pathogenesis.
Rheumatology (Oxford).
2010; 49(9): 1645–53. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
68.
Jelusić M, Lukić IK, Tambić-Bukovac L, et al.:
Interleukin-18 as a mediator of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Clin Rheumatol.
2007; 26(8): 1332–4. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
69.
Maeno N, Takei S, Nomura Y, et al.:
Highly elevated serum levels of interleukin-18 in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis but not in other juvenile idiopathic arthritis subtypes or in Kawasaki disease: comment on the article by Kawashima et al.Arthritis Rheum.
2002; 46(9): 2539–41; author reply 2541–2. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
70.
Lotito AP, Campa A, Silva CA, et al.:
Interleukin 18 as a marker of disease activity and severity in patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
J Rheumatol.
2007; 34(4): 823–30. PubMed Abstract
71.
Dinarello CA:
Interleukin-18 and the pathogenesis of inflammatory diseases.
Semin Nephrol.
2007; 27(1): 98–114. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
72.
Chiossone L, Audonnet S, Chetaille B, et al.:
Protection from inflammatory organ damage in a murine model of hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis using treatment with IL-18 binding protein.
Front Immunol.
2012; 3: 239. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
73.
Canna SW, Girard C, Malle L, et al.:
Life-threatening NLRC4-associated hyperinflammation successfully treated with IL-18 inhibition.
J Allergy Clin Immunol.
2017; 139(5): 1698–701. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
74.
Omoyinmi E, Hamaoui R, Pesenacker A, et al.:
Th1 and Th17 cell subpopulations are enriched in the peripheral blood of patients with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Rheumatology (Oxford).
2012; 51(10): 1881–6. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
80.
Lin CI, Yu HH, Lee JH, et al.:
Clinical analysis of macrophage activation syndrome in pediatric patients with autoimmune diseases.
Clin Rheumatol.
2012; 31(8): 1223–30. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
81.
Maschalidi S, Sepulveda FE, Garrigue A, et al.:
Therapeutic effect of JAK1/2 blockade on the manifestations of hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis in mice.
Blood.
2016; 128(1): 60–71. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
83.
DeWitt EM, Kimura Y, Beukelman T, et al.:
Consensus treatment plans for new-onset systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken).
2012; 64(7): 1001–10. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
84.
Kimura Y, DeWitt EM, Beukelman T, et al.:
Adding canakinumab to the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance consensus treatment plans for systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Comment on the article by DeWitt et al.Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken).
2014; 66(9): 1430–1. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
1
Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA 2
Department of Pediatrics, Program in Immunology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
This work was supported by the Systemic JIA Foundation (to EM) and the University of California at San Francisco-Stanford Arthritis Center of Excellence, funded by the Great Western Region of the Arthritis Foundation (to EM).
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Canny S and Mellins E. New frontiers in the treatment of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2017, 6(F1000 Faculty Rev):971 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.11327.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.
Share
Open Peer Review
Current Reviewer Status:
?
Key to Reviewer Statuses
VIEWHIDE
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations
A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an
... Continue reading
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Faculty Reviews are commissioned and written by members of the prestigious Faculty Opinions Faculty, and are edited as a service to our readers. In order to make these reviews as comprehensive and accessible as possible, we seek the reviewers’ input before publication. The reviewers’ names and any additional comments they may have are published alongside the review, as is usual on F1000Research.
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an
... Continue reading
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Faculty Reviews are commissioned and written by members of the prestigious Faculty Opinions Faculty, and are edited as a service to our readers. In order to make these reviews as comprehensive and accessible as possible, we seek the reviewers’ input before publication. The reviewers’ names and any additional comments they may have are published alongside the review, as is usual on F1000Research.
I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations -
A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Adjust parameters to alter display
View on desktop for interactive features
Includes Interactive Elements
View on desktop for interactive features
Competing Interests Policy
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:
Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests'
Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper.
You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors.
You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student).
You work at the same institute as any of the authors.
You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission.
You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published.
Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests'
You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements.
You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors.
You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on.
Stay Updated
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles
Comments on this article Comments (0)