Afzal Chaudhry

BACKGROUND: Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis is a severe condition encompassing two major syndromes: granulomatosis with polyangiitis (formerly known as Wegener's granulomatosis) and microscopic polyangiitis. Its cause is unknown, and there is debate about whether it is a single disease entity and what role ANCA plays in its pathogenesis. We investigated its genetic basis. METHODS: A genomewide association study was performed in a discovery cohort of 1233 U.K. patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis and 5884 controls and was replicated in 1454 Northern European case patients and 1666 controls. Quality control, population stratification, and statistical analyses were performed according to standard criteria. RESULTS: We found both major-histocompatibility-complex (MHC) and non-MHC associations with ANCA-associated vasculitis and also that granulomatosis with polyangiitis and microscopic polyangiitis were genetically distinct. The strongest genetic associations were with the antigenic specificity of ANCA, not with the clinical syndrome. Anti-proteinase 3 ANCA was associated with HLA-DP and the genes encoding α(1)-antitrypsin (SERPINA1) and proteinase 3 (PRTN3) (P=6.2×10(-89), P=5.6×10(-12,) and P=2.6×10(-7), respectively). Anti-myeloperoxidase ANCA was associated with HLA-DQ (P=2.1×10(-8)). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that the pathogenesis of ANCA-associated vasculitis has a genetic component, shows genetic distinctions between granulomatosis with polyangiitis and microscopic polyangiitis that are associated with ANCA specificity, and suggests that the response against the autoantigen proteinase 3 is a central pathogenic feature of proteinase 3 ANCA-associated vasculitis. These data provide preliminary support for the concept that proteinase 3 ANCA-associated vasculitis and myeloperoxidase ANCA-associated vasculitis are distinct autoimmune syndromes. (Funded by the British Heart Foundation and others.).

OBJECTIVE: B cell depletion with rituximab has allowed remissions in relapsing or refractory antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis in small studies. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of rituximab for ANCA-associated vasculitis in a larger multicenter cohort. This permitted comparison of rituximab dosing regimens, the value of continuing immunosuppression, and investigation of ANCA and B cell levels as re-treatment biomarkers. METHODS: Retrospective, standardized data collection from 65 sequential patients receiving rituximab for refractory ANCA-associated vasculitis at 4 centers in the UK was used. RESULTS: All patients achieved B cell depletion. Complete remission occurred in 49 of the 65 patients (75%), partial remission in 15 (23%), and no response in 1 (2%). The prednisolone dosage was reduced from 12.5 mg/day (median) to 9.0 mg/day at 6 months (P = 0.0006). Immunosuppressive therapy was withdrawn in 37 of 60 patients (62%). Twenty-eight of 49 patients who achieved full remission (57%) experienced relapse (median 11.5 months). B cell return preceded relapse in 14 of 27 patients (52%). Although ANCA levels fell after rituximab therapy, relapse was not associated with ANCA positivity or a rise in ANCA levels. Neither the initial rituximab regimen (4 infusions of 375 mg/m(2) each given 1 week apart or 2 infusions of 1 gm each given 2 weeks apart) nor withdrawal of immunosuppressive therapy (37 of 60 patients [62%]) influenced the timing of relapse. Thirty-eight patients received >or=2 courses of rituximab, and complete remission was induced or maintained in 32 of them (84%). IgM levels fell, although IgG levels remained stable. Forty-six serious adverse events occurred, including 2 episodes of late-onset neutropenia, which were attributed to rituximab. CONCLUSION: Rituximab was effective remission induction therapy for refractory ANCA-associated vasculitis in this study. There was no difference in efficacy between the 2 main treatment regimens. Continuing immunosuppression did not reduce relapses. Relapses occurred, but re-treatment was effective and safe. There was no clear influence of rituximab on the frequency of serious adverse events. ANCA and B cell levels lacked sufficient sensitivity to guide the timing of re-treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Rituximab is effective induction therapy in refractory or relapsing antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV). However, further relapse is common, and maintenance strategies are required. The aim of this study was to reduce relapse rates using a fixed-interval rituximab re-treatment protocol. METHODS: Retrospective, standardized collection of data from sequential patients receiving rituximab for refractory or relapsing AAV at a single center was studied. Group A patients (n = 28) received rituximab induction therapy (4 infusions of 375 mg/m(2) or 2 infusions 1 gm) and further rituximab at the time of subsequent relapse. Group B patients (n = 45) received routine rituximab re-treatment for 2 years: 2 doses of 1 gm each for remission induction, then 1 gm every 6 months (total of 6 gm). Group C patients (n = 19) comprised patients in group A who subsequently relapsed and began routine re-treatment for 2 years. RESULTS: Response (complete/partial remission) occurred in 26 of the 28 patients (93%) in group A, 43 of the 45 patients (96%) in group B, and 18 of the 19 patients (95%) in group C. At 2 years, relapses had occurred in 19 of 26 patients (73%) in group A, 5 of 43 (12%) in group B (P < 0.001), and 2 of 18 (11%) in group C (P < 0.001). At the last followup (median of 44 months), relapses had occurred in 85% of those in group A (22 of 26), 26% of those in group B (11 of 43; P < 0.001), and 56% of those in group C (10 of 18; P = 0.001). Glucocorticoid dosages were decreased and immunosuppression therapy was withdrawn in the majority of patients. Routine rituximab re-treatment was well tolerated, and no new safety issues were identified. CONCLUSION: Two-year, fixed-interval rituximab re-treatment was associated with a reduction in relapse rates during the re-treatment period and a more prolonged period of remission during subsequent followup. In the absence of biomarkers that accurately predict relapse, routine rituximab re-treatment may be an effective strategy for remission maintenance in patients with refractory and relapsing AAV.