Suppression of Serum Interferon-γ Levels as a Potential Measure of Response to Ustekinumab Treatment in Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Matteo Cesaroni, Loqmane Seridi, Matthew J Loza, Jessica Schreiter, Kristen Sweet, Carol Franks, Keying Ma, Ashley Orillion, Kim Campbell, Robert M Gordon, Patrick Branigan, Peter Lipsky, Ronald van Vollenhoven, Bevra H Hahn, George C Tsokos, Marc Chevrier, Shawn Rose, Frédéric Baribaud, Jarrat Jordan, Matteo Cesaroni, Loqmane Seridi, Matthew J Loza, Jessica Schreiter, Kristen Sweet, Carol Franks, Keying Ma, Ashley Orillion, Kim Campbell, Robert M Gordon, Patrick Branigan, Peter Lipsky, Ronald van Vollenhoven, Bevra H Hahn, George C Tsokos, Marc Chevrier, Shawn Rose, Frédéric Baribaud, Jarrat Jordan

Abstract

Objective: In a previously reported phase II randomized, placebo-controlled, interventional trial, we demonstrated that treatment with ustekinumab, an anti-interleukin-12 (IL-12)/IL-23 p40 neutralizing monoclonal antibody, improved global and organ-specific measures of disease activity in patients with active systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Utilizing the biomarker data from this phase II clinical study, we sought to determine whether modulation of the expression of IL-12, IL-23, or both cytokines by ustekinumab is associated with clinical efficacy in patients with SLE.

Methods: This phase II randomized, placebo-controlled study enrolled 102 patients with autoantibody-positive SLE whose disease remained active despite standard-of-care therapy. Patients were randomized at a 3:2 ratio to receive ~6 mg/kg ustekinumab intravenously or placebo at week 0, followed by subcutaneous injections of 90 mg ustekinumab or placebo every 8 weeks, with placebo crossover to 90 mg ustekinumab every 8 weeks. The SLE Responder Index 4 (SRI-4) at week 24 was used to determine which patients could be classified as ustekinumab responders and which could be classified as nonresponders. In addition to measurements of p40 and IL-23, serum levels of interferon-γ (IFNγ), IL-17A, IL-17F, and IL-22, as a proxy for the IL-12 and IL-23 pathways, were quantified by immunoassay.

Results: Changes in the serum levels of IL-17A, IL-17F, and IL-22 at different time points after treatment were not consistently significantly associated with an SRI-4 clinical response to ustekinumab in patients with SLE. In contrast, an SRI-4 response to ustekinumab was significantly associated (P < 0.01) with durable reductions in the serum IFNγ protein levels at several time points relative to baseline, which was not observed in ustekinumab nonresponders or patients who received placebo.

Conclusion: While not diminishing a potential role of IL-23, these serum biomarker assessments indicate that IL-12 blockade has an important role in the mechanism of action of ustekinumab treatment in patients with SLE.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02349061.

© 2020 The Authors. Arthritis & Rheumatology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Assessment of serum levels of p40 and interleukin‐23 (IL‐23). A and B, Serum levels of p40 (A) and IL‐23 (B) were determined in healthy controls (n = 60) and at baseline in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in the placebo (PBO) or ustekinumab (UST) treatment groups (subject numbers at week 0 shown at bottom of C and D) by response status at week 24 (responder [R] versus nonresponder [NR]). Data are shown as box plots. Each box represents the 25th to 75th percentiles. Lines inside the boxes represent the median. Lines outside the boxes represent the 10th and 90th percentiles. Circles indicate outliers. C and D, Longitudinal serum concentrations of p40 (C) and IL‐23 (D) were compared between the ustekinumab and placebo groups of SLE patients by response status. Results are shown as the median change from baseline with median absolute deviation of the change. Numbers of subjects with available samples are indicated at each time point. * = P < 0.05; ** = P < 0.01; *** = P < 0.001; **** = P < 0.0001 versus baseline within group in C and D or as indicated in A. Asterisk color in C and D matches the treatment response group in which a significant difference was achieved. P values were computed using t‐tests.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Assessment of serum levels of interferon‐γ (IFNγ). A, Serum levels of IFNγ were determined in healthy controls (n = 60) and at baseline in patients with SLE in the placebo or ustekinumab treatment groups (subject numbers at week 0 shown at bottom of B) by response status at week 24. Data are shown as box plots. Each box represents the 25th to 75th percentiles. Lines inside the boxes represent the median. Lines outside the boxes represent the 10th and 90th percentiles. Circles indicate outliers. B, Longitudinal serum concentrations of IFNγ were compared between the ustekinumab and placebo groups of SLE patients by response status. Results are shown as the median change from baseline with median absolute deviation of the change. Numbers of subjects with available samples are indicated at each time point. ** = P < 0.01; *** = P < 0.001; **** = P < 0.0001 versus baseline within group in B or as indicated in A. † = P < 0.05 for responders versus nonresponders. Footnote symbol color matches the treatment response group in which a significant difference was achieved. P values were computed using t‐tests. See Figure 1 for other definitions.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Assessment of serum levels of IL‐17A, IL‐17F, and IL‐22 through week 24 in the placebo and ustekinumab treatment groups of SLE patients according to response status. Results are shown as the median change from baseline with median absolute deviation of the change. Numbers of subjects with available samples at each time point are indicated below the graphs. * = P < 0.05; ** = P < 0.01 versus baseline within group. Asterisk color indicates the treatment response group in which a significant difference was achieved. P values were computed using t‐tests. See Figure 1 for definitions.

References

    1. Van Vollenhoven RF, Hahn BH, Tsokos GC, Wagner CL, Lipsky P, Touma Z, et al. Efficacy and safety of ustekinumab, an IL‐12 and IL‐23 inhibitor, in patients with active systemic lupus erythematosus: results of a multicentre, double‐blind, phase 2, randomised, controlled study. Lancet 2018;392:1330–9.
    1. Grammer AC, Ryals MM, Heuer SE, Robl RD, Madamanchi S, Davis LS, et al. Drug repositioning in SLE: crowd‐sourcing, literature‐mining and Big Data analysis. Lupus 2016;25:1150–70.
    1. Powell MD, Read KA, Sreekumar BK, Jones DM, Oestreich KJ. IL‐12 signaling drives the differentiation and function of a TH1‐derived TFH1‐like cell population. Sci Rep 2019;9:13991.
    1. Dai J, Liu B, Cua DJ, Li Z. Essential roles of IL‐12 and dendritic cells but not IL‐23 and macrophages in lupus‐like diseases initiated by cell surface HSP gp96. Eur J Immunol 2007;37:706–15.
    1. Dai H, He F, Tsokos GC, Kyttaris VC. IL‐23 limits the production of IL‐2 and promotes autoimmunity in lupus. J Immunol 2017;199:903–10.
    1. Zickert A, Amoudruz P, Sundstrom Y, Ronnelid J, Malmstrom V, Gunnarsson I. IL‐17 and IL‐23 in lupus nephritis: association to histopathology and response to treatment. BMC Immunol 2015;16:7.
    1. Petri M, Orbai AM, Alarcón GS, Gordon C, Merrill JT, Fortin PR, et al. Derivation and validation of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 2012;64:2677–86.
    1. Furie RA, Petri MA, Wallace DJ, Ginzler EM, Merrill JT, Stohl W, et al. Novel evidence‐based systemic lupus erythematosus responder index. Arthritis Rheum 2009;61:1143–51.
    1. Langley RG, Tsai TF, Flavin S, Song M, Randazzo B, Wasfi Y, et al. Efficacy and safety of guselkumab in patients with psoriasis who have an inadequate response to ustekinumab: results of the randomized, double‐blind, phase III NAVIGATE trial. Br J Dermatol 2018;178:114–23.
    1. Theofilopoulos AN, Koundouris S, Kono DH, Lawson BR. The role of IFN‐γ in systemic lupus erythematosus: a challenge to the Th1/Th2 paradigm in autoimmunity. Arthritis Res 2001;3:136–41.
    1. Munroe ME, Lu R, Zhao YD, Fife DA, Robertson JM, Guthridge JM, et al. Altered type II interferon precedes autoantibody accrual and elevated type I interferon activity prior to systemic lupus erythematosus classification. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75:2014–21.
    1. Boedigheimer MJ, Martin DA, Amoura Z, Sanchez‐Guerrero J, Romero‐Diaz J, Kivitz A, et al. Safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of AMG 811, an anti‐interferon‐γ monoclonal antibody, in SLE subjects without or with lupus nephritis. Lupus Sci Med 2017;4:e000226.
    1. Werth VP, Fiorentino D, Sullivan BA, Boedigheimer MJ, Chiu K, Wang C, et al. Pharmacodynamics, safety, and clinical efficacy of AMG 811, a human anti–interferon‐γ antibody, in patients with discoid lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheumatol 2017;69:1028–34.
    1. Campbell K, Branigan P, Yang F, Chen Y, Orlovsky Y, Elloso MM, et al. Selective IL‐23 blockade with guselkumab (GUS) neutralizes Th17‐ and psoriasis‐associated serum, cellular, and transcriptomic measures more potently than dual IL‐12/23 blockade with ustekinumab (UST) [abstract]. Exp Dermatol 2018;27:43–4.
    1. Siebert S, Loza MJ, Song Q, McInnes I, Sweet K. Ustekinumab and guselkumab treatment results in differences in serum IL17A, IL17F and CRP levels in psoriatic arthritis patients: a comparison from ustekinumab PH3 and guselkumab PH2 programs [abstract]. Ann Rheum Dis 2019;78:A293.

Source: PubMed

3
Iratkozz fel