9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Dupilumab-induced ocular surface disease (DIOSD) in patients with atopic dermatitis: clinical presentation, risk factors for development and outcomes of treatment with tacrolimus ointment

      , , , , ,
      British Journal of Ophthalmology
      BMJ

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aim

          To identify risk factors for the development of dupilumab-induced ocular surface disease (DIOSD) in adult patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) and describe outcomes of treatment.

          Methods

          A retrospective institutional cohort study performed at the Rabin Medical Center, Petach Tikva, Israel. Adult patients with AD who received dupilumab from March 2018 to June 2019 were included. Demographics, AD severity scores, blood IgE levels, previous atopic keratoconjunctivitis (AKC), dermatological response to dupilumab, ophthalmological evaluation and treatment were noted. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify risk factors for DIOSD.

          Results

          Sixteen of 37 patients who were included in the study (43%) had new or exacerbated symptoms of ocular surface disease starting at 2 weeks following the first treatment. Three patients reported transient dry eye sensation which lasted 2 weeks; nine patients reported chronic dry eye sensation, and four patients (25%) had marked blepharoconjunctivitis. The presence of severe AD was the strongest predictor of DIOSD. Not a single patient with moderate AD had DIOSD. In multivariate analysis, prior AKC was a risk factor for DIOSD (R 2=15.78, OR=23.28, p=0.005) while a family history of atopy was protective of DIOSD (R 2=6.22, OR=0.13, p=0.05). All four patients with blepharoconjunctivitis had resolution of signs, and symptoms within days of starting periocular 0.03%–0.1% tacrolimus ointment.

          Conclusions

          DIOSD is common in patients with AD receiving dupilumab. While most cases are mild, some patients can develop blepharoconjunctivitis which responds well to tacrolimus ointment. AD severity, and previous AKC are risk factors for DIOSD.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Conjunctivitis in dupilumab clinical trials

          Summary Background Dupilumab blocks the shared receptor component for interleukin (IL)‐4 and IL‐13. It is approved in the U.S.A. for patients aged ≥ 12 years with moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis (AD) uncontrolled by topical prescription medicines or who cannot use topical medicines, for patients in Japan whose AD is uncontrolled with existing therapies, for patients with moderate‐to‐severe AD in Europe who are candidates for systemic therapy and for patients aged ≥ 12 years for maintenance treatment of moderate‐to‐severe asthma uncontrolled with their current medicines. AD trials have reported increased incidence of conjunctivitis for dupilumab vs. placebo. Objectives To characterize further the occurrence and risk factors of conjunctivitis in dupilumab clinical trials. Methods We evaluated randomized placebo‐controlled trials of dupilumab in AD (n = 2629), asthma (n = 2876), chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) (n = 60) and eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) (n = 47). Results In most AD trials, dupilumab‐treated patients had higher conjunctivitis incidence than placebo controls. Higher baseline AD severity and previous history of conjunctivitis were associated with increased conjunctivitis incidence. Conjunctivitis was mostly mild to moderate. Most cases recovered or resolved during the treatment period; two patients permanently discontinued dupilumab due to conjunctivitis or keratitis. Common treatments included ophthalmic corticosteroids, antibiotics, and antihistamines or mast cell stabilizers. Most cases were diagnosed by the investigators. In asthma and CRSwNP trials, the incidence of conjunctivitis was lower for both dupilumab and placebo than in AD trials; dupilumab did not increase the incidence compared with placebo. In the EoE trial, no patients had conjunctivitis. Conclusions Conjunctivitis was more frequent with dupilumab treatment in most AD trials. In dupilumab trials in other type 2 diseases, incidence of conjunctivitis was overall very low, and was similar for dupilumab and placebo. In AD, the incidence of conjunctivitis was associated with AD severity and prior history of conjunctivitis. The aetiology and treatment of conjunctivitis in dupilumab‐treated patients require further study. What's already known about this topic? Ocular disorders, including allergic conjunctivitis, are common in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD). In most dupilumab AD trials, dupilumab‐treated patients had higher conjunctivitis incidence than those receiving placebo. Most cases were mild to moderate and recovered or were recovering during study treatment; study treatment discontinuation due to conjunctivitis was rare. Conjunctivitis incidence was very low and similar for dupilumab and placebo in clinical trials in asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and eosinophilic oesophagitis. What does this study add? This analysis confirms and extends the results of the individual clinical trials. Baseline disease‐related factors, including AD severity, prior conjunctivitis history and certain biomarkers (thymus and activation‐regulated chemokine, IgE, eosinophils), were associated with increased incidence of conjunctivitis. Patients who responded well to dupilumab had reduced incidence of conjunctivitis. Further study is needed to elucidate the aetiology and treatment of conjunctivitis in dupilumab‐treated patients with AD.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Adverse events of Dupilumab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: A meta-analysis.

            Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody against interleukin-4 receptor alpha, inhibits the signals of interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, and has also shown significant efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD), while the effect of it on adverse events remains controversial.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Goblet cell scarcity and conjunctival inflammation during treatment with dupilumab in patients with atopic dermatitis

              Dear Editor, Higher rates of conjunctivitis have been reported in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) treated with dupilumab, an anti‐interleukin (IL)‐4Rα antibody inhibiting IL‐4 and IL‐13, vs. patients treated with placebo.1 However, the exact pathomechanism has not been clarified. Given the necessity for optimal treatment and risk management, the aim of this study was to describe the histopathological characteristics of conjunctivitis during dupilumab treatment in patients with AD. Participants, selected from the BioDay registry, consisted of 74 patients with moderate‐to‐severe AD treated with dupilumab for at least 16 weeks. Of these, 23% developed ophthalmologist‐confirmed conjunctivitis requiring anti‐inflammatory treatment. We sequentially included six patients [three male; median age 39 years, interquartile range (IQR) 29–54] in whom a diagnostic conjunctival biopsy of the inferior fornix was performed before initiation of ocular anti‐inflammatory treatment. Biopsies were fixed, paraffin‐embedded and stained with haematoxylin and eosin for histological assessment, and additionally with CD3/CD4 [T helper (Th) cells] and Alcian blue [mucus‐containing goblet cells (GCs)]. Conjunctival biopsies of two healthy controls were included. Biopsies were assessed by two independent experienced pathologists. This study did not fall under the scope of the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act, confirmed by the local Medical Research Ethics Committee (METC 18/537). The most prominent histopathological feature in conjunctival biopsies from patients with AD developing conjunctivitis during dupilumab treatment was a scarcity of intraepithelial GCs. Median GC density was 3·3 cells mm−1 (IQR 1·1–4·9)(Fig. 1a, b) in patients with AD with conjunctivitis vs. 28·3 and 36·3 cells mm−1 in the two control samples. Five patients showed a multicellular immune‐cell stromal infiltrate, consisting mainly of T cells (CD3+/CD4+) and eosinophils (Fig. 1c), partially migrating into the conjunctival epithelium. Figure 1 Alcian blue‐stained histological sections of the inferior bulbar conjunctiva under light microscopy shows the presence of decreased goblet‐cell density in patients with AD treated with dupilumab (original magnification × 40). (a) Regions with no goblet cells (GCs) interspersed with smaller regions of normal GC density. (b) In patient 6 no GC was found in the conjunctival biopsy. (c) Haematoxylin and eosin stained histological sections of the inferior bulbar conjunctiva under light microscopy show the presence of a superficial inflammatory multicellular infiltrate in the conjunctival stroma consisting of mainly T cells and eosinophils, partially migrating into the conjunctival epithelium. Conjunctival GCs are specialized mucus‐secreting cells, vital for ocular surface function.2 In healthy individuals lower forniceal GC counts vary between 8·8 and 30 cells mm−1.3 All patients included in our study had a decreased GC count (median 3·3 cells mm−1) vs. controls (mean 32·3 cells mm−1). Mice studies have demonstrated that ocular IL‐13 expression normally stimulates GC proliferation and mucus secretion.4 By blocking IL‐13, dupilumab treatment may lead to GC hypoplasia, as IL‐4Rα is expressed on conjunctival epithelium. This might result in decreased mucin production, subsequent tear film instability and mucosal epithelial barrier dysfunction, leading to conjunctival inflammation in a subpopulation of (predisposed) patients with AD. Clinically, the loss of GC‐produced factors may result in dry eyes, as was reported by all patients, and subsequently irritative conjunctivitis. As in this study biopsies were performed after initiation of dupilumab, GC scarcity might already be present before dupilumab treatment, although patients did not experience ocular symptoms at start of treatment. Our histopathological findings do not correspond with the histopathology of atopic keratoconjunctivitis and allergic conjunctivitis, which is associated with an increased GC density and increased mucus production, probably due to IL‐13 overexpression.5, 6 Dupilumab treatment might theoretically be beneficial in these typical Th2‐mediated ocular surface diseases. It has been proposed that dupilumab treatment could increase Demodex numbers in hair follicles, causing ocular rosacea‐like disease.7 Ocular rosacea is a Th17‐driven disease characterized by an inflammatory cell infiltrate, mainly consisting of CD4+ T cells, but not eosinophils.8 The unique combination of low conjunctival GC numbers accompanied by numerous lymphocytes and eosinophils found in this study may imply a new entity of conjunctivitis in dupilumab‐treated patients with AD. Only patients with new onset of conjunctivitis symptoms or worsened symptoms in cases of pre‐existing conjunctivitis were included in this study; these probably do not represent all conjunctivitis cases during dupilumab treatment. In daily practice, we experience some patients reporting improvement of conjunctivitis symptoms during dupilumab treatment, underlining the heterogeneity of the conjunctivitis. Limitations of this study are small sample size, and collection of conjunctival biopsies at one single time point. Therefore, dynamic differences in histopathological features before and during dupilumab treatment could not be studied. Nevertheless, the histopathological features and findings were very consistent, and constitute a first clue in the underlying pathomechanism of dupilumab‐associated conjunctivitis. However, the exact pathomechanism of this new entity of conjunctivitis could not be fully elucidated. In conclusion, this study found a remarkable scarcity of conjunctival GCs accompanied by an inflammatory T‐cell‐ and eosinophilic infiltrate in patients with AD with conjunctivitis during dupilumab treatment. We hypothesize that the IL‐13 blocking effect of dupilumab might lead to reduction of GCs and mucin production in a subpopulation of patients with AD, which may potentially result in irritative conjunctivitis. A prospective study further characterizing conjunctivitis in patients with AD before and during dupilumab treatment will start soon.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                British Journal of Ophthalmology
                Br J Ophthalmol
                BMJ
                0007-1161
                1468-2079
                May 21 2020
                June 2020
                June 2020
                September 25 2019
                : 104
                : 6
                : 776-779
                Article
                10.1136/bjophthalmol-2019-315010
                31554632
                1730bf8d-dadd-4b2f-8f9c-122cee8841bd
                © 2019
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article