Discontinuation of hydroxychloroquine in older patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: a multicenter retrospective study.


Journal

Arthritis research & therapy
ISSN: 1478-6362
Titre abrégé: Arthritis Res Ther
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101154438

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
17 08 2020
Historique:
received: 01 06 2020
accepted: 31 07 2020
entrez: 19 8 2020
pubmed: 19 8 2020
medline: 22 6 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Although hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is a mainstay of treatment for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), ocular toxicity can result from accumulated exposure. As the longevity of patients with SLE improves, data are needed to balance the risk of ocular toxicity and the risk of disease flare, especially in older patients with quiescent disease. Accordingly, this study was initiated to examine the safety of HCQ withdrawal in older SLE patients. Data were obtained by retrospective chart review at three major lupus centers in New York City. Twenty-six patients who discontinued HCQ and thirty-two patients on HCQ matched for gender, race/ethnicity, and age were included in this study. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a lupus flare classified by the revised version of the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus: National Assessment version of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SELENA-SLEDAI) Flare composite index, within 1 year of HCQ withdrawal or matched time of continuation. Five patients (19.2%) in the HCQ withdrawal group compared to five (15.6%) in the HCQ continuation group experienced a flare of any severity (odds ratio [OR] = 1.28; 95% CI 0.31, 5.30; p = 0.73). There were no severe flares in either group. The results were similar after adjusting for length of SLE, number of American College of Rheumatology criteria, low complement levels, and SELENA-SLEDAI score, and in a propensity score analysis (OR = 1.18; 95% CI 0.23, 6.16; p = 0.84). The analysis of time to any flare revealed a non-significant earlier time to flare in the HCQ withdrawal group (log-rank p = 0.67). Most flares were in the cutaneous and musculoskeletal systems, but one patient in the continuation group developed pericarditis. The most common reason for HCQ withdrawal was retinal toxicity (42.3%), followed by patient's preference (34.6%), other confirmed or suspected adverse effects (15.4%), ophthalmologist recommendation for macular degeneration (3.8%), and rheumatologist recommendation for quiescent SLE (3.8%). In this retrospective study of older stable patients with SLE on long-term HCQ, withdrawal did not significantly increase the risk of flares.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Although hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is a mainstay of treatment for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), ocular toxicity can result from accumulated exposure. As the longevity of patients with SLE improves, data are needed to balance the risk of ocular toxicity and the risk of disease flare, especially in older patients with quiescent disease. Accordingly, this study was initiated to examine the safety of HCQ withdrawal in older SLE patients.
METHODS
Data were obtained by retrospective chart review at three major lupus centers in New York City. Twenty-six patients who discontinued HCQ and thirty-two patients on HCQ matched for gender, race/ethnicity, and age were included in this study. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a lupus flare classified by the revised version of the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus: National Assessment version of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SELENA-SLEDAI) Flare composite index, within 1 year of HCQ withdrawal or matched time of continuation.
RESULTS
Five patients (19.2%) in the HCQ withdrawal group compared to five (15.6%) in the HCQ continuation group experienced a flare of any severity (odds ratio [OR] = 1.28; 95% CI 0.31, 5.30; p = 0.73). There were no severe flares in either group. The results were similar after adjusting for length of SLE, number of American College of Rheumatology criteria, low complement levels, and SELENA-SLEDAI score, and in a propensity score analysis (OR = 1.18; 95% CI 0.23, 6.16; p = 0.84). The analysis of time to any flare revealed a non-significant earlier time to flare in the HCQ withdrawal group (log-rank p = 0.67). Most flares were in the cutaneous and musculoskeletal systems, but one patient in the continuation group developed pericarditis. The most common reason for HCQ withdrawal was retinal toxicity (42.3%), followed by patient's preference (34.6%), other confirmed or suspected adverse effects (15.4%), ophthalmologist recommendation for macular degeneration (3.8%), and rheumatologist recommendation for quiescent SLE (3.8%).
CONCLUSIONS
In this retrospective study of older stable patients with SLE on long-term HCQ, withdrawal did not significantly increase the risk of flares.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32807233
doi: 10.1186/s13075-020-02282-0
pii: 10.1186/s13075-020-02282-0
pmc: PMC7430013
doi:

Substances chimiques

Antirheumatic Agents 0
Hydroxychloroquine 4QWG6N8QKH

Types de publication

Journal Article Multicenter Study Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

191

Subventions

Organisme : NIAMS NIH HHS
ID : R34 AR075283
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAMS NIH HHS
ID : R34AR075283
Pays : United States

Références

Drug Saf. 2018 Oct;41(10):919-931
pubmed: 29858838
Can J Cardiol. 2014 Dec;30(12):1706-15
pubmed: 25475472
Lupus. 2002;11(6):356-61
pubmed: 12139373
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2002 Aug;41(8):924-9
pubmed: 12154210
Arthritis Rheum. 2006 Nov;54(11):3640-7
pubmed: 17075810
Ann Rheum Dis. 2011 May;70(5):760-5
pubmed: 21177297
Ophthalmology. 2011 Feb;118(2):415-22
pubmed: 21292109
Arthritis Rheum. 2012 Jan;64(1):285-96
pubmed: 22031171
Ophthalmology. 2003 Jul;110(7):1321-6
pubmed: 12867385
Lupus. 2006;15(9):577-83
pubmed: 17080912
N Engl J Med. 1991 Jan 17;324(3):150-4
pubmed: 1984192
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2019 Jan;71(1):104-115
pubmed: 29648687
Ann Rheum Dis. 2014 Mar;73(3):557-66
pubmed: 23436914
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Apr;98(14):e15030
pubmed: 30946340
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010 Jun;62(6):775-84
pubmed: 20535788
Lupus. 2005;14(2):106-12
pubmed: 15751814
Am J Med. 1983 Jul 18;75(1A):40-5
pubmed: 6869410
Am J Ophthalmol. 2016 Jun;166:ix-xi
pubmed: 27133016
Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2004 Apr;33(5):336-51
pubmed: 15079764
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2005 Oct;44(10):1303-7
pubmed: 16030085
Am J Med. 1994 Mar;96(3):254-9
pubmed: 8154514
N Engl J Med. 2005 Dec 15;353(24):2550-8
pubmed: 16354891
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014 Feb;66(2):369-78
pubmed: 24504809
Circulation. 2012 Jul 3;126(1):76-82
pubmed: 22626746
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Jul 21;76(3):292-302
pubmed: 32674792
Scand J Rheumatol. 1996;25(4):191-3
pubmed: 8792794
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017 Oct;69(10):1996-2005
pubmed: 28891237
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2017 Oct;69(10):2006-2017
pubmed: 28891252
Ann Rheum Dis. 2007 Sep;66(9):1168-72
pubmed: 17389655
Arthritis Rheum. 2012 Aug;64(8):2677-86
pubmed: 22553077
Arthritis Rheum. 2005 May;52(5):1473-80
pubmed: 15880829
J Rheumatol. 2006 Nov;33(11):2192-8
pubmed: 16981295
Dermatol Ther. 2007 Jul-Aug;20(4):160-74
pubmed: 17970883
Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2013 Mar;2(1):77-83
pubmed: 24062937
Arthritis Rheum. 1987 Dec;30(12):1435-6
pubmed: 3435574
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2014 Dec;132(12):1453-60
pubmed: 25275721
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014 Feb;66(2):357-68
pubmed: 24504808
Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Oct;69(10):1827-30
pubmed: 20447951
Arthritis Rheum. 2010 Mar;62(3):855-62
pubmed: 20131238
Arthritis Rheum. 1997 Sep;40(9):1725
pubmed: 9324032
Ophthalmology. 2016 Jun;123(6):1386-94
pubmed: 26992838
Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2014 Mar-Apr;32(2):162-7
pubmed: 24480124
Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Jan;69(1):20-8
pubmed: 19103632
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2015 May;67(8):2176-84
pubmed: 25989906
Ann Rheum Dis. 2014 Jun;73(6):1176-80
pubmed: 23933625
Arthritis Rheum. 2009 Jun 15;61(6):830-9
pubmed: 19479701
Arthritis Rheum. 2010 Jul;62(7):2073-85
pubmed: 20506142
Lupus. 1996 Jun;5 Suppl 1:S16-22
pubmed: 8803905
Ann Rheum Dis. 2018 Dec;77(12):1742-1749
pubmed: 30297329
Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014 Sep;66(9):2494-502
pubmed: 24891315

Auteurs

Ruth Fernandez-Ruiz (R)

Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. Ruth.FernandezRuiz@nyulangone.org.

Nicole Bornkamp (N)

Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Mimi Y Kim (MY)

Division of Biostatistics, Department of Epidemiology & Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

Anca Askanase (A)

Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons, New York, NY, USA.

Anna Zezon (A)

Division of Rheumatology, Englewood Hospital and Medical Center, Englewood, NJ, USA.

Chung-E Tseng (CE)

Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

H Michael Belmont (HM)

Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

Amit Saxena (A)

Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

Jane E Salmon (JE)

Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Hospital for Special Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.

Michael Lockshin (M)

Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Hospital for Special Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.

Jill P Buyon (JP)

Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

Peter M Izmirly (PM)

Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. Peter.Izmirly@nyulangone.org.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH