4.3 Review

Therapeutic drug monitoring with biologic agents in immune mediated inflammatory diseases

期刊

EXPERT REVIEW OF CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY
卷 15, 期 8, 页码 837-848

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/1744666X.2019.1630273

关键词

Inflammatory bowel disease; rheumatoid arthritis; psoriasis; biologic therapy; immunogenicity; therapeutic drug monitoring; anti-TNF therapy; secukinumab; ustekinumab; vedolizumab

资金

  1. Ruth L. Kirschstein NRSA Institutional Research Training Grant [5T32DK007760-18]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Biologic therapy has revolutionized the treatment of immune mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID), such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis and psoriasis. Nevertheless, some patients exhibit primary nonresponse (PNR) or secondary loss of response (SLR) to biologics. Areas covered: This collaborative review provides data on the role of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in IMID for optimizing biologic therapy including infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab pegol etanercept and golimumab vedolizumab, secukinumab and ustekinumab. Expert opinion: Most exposure-response relationship studies show a positive correlation between biologic drug concentrations and favorable therapeutic outcomes in IMID with higher drug concentrations typically associated with more objective outcomes. Clinically, reactive TDM rationalizes the management of PNR and SLR to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy and is emerging as the new standard of care in IBD as it is also more cost-effective than empiric dose escalation. Preliminary data suggest that proactive TDM with the goal to achieve a threshold drug concentration is associated with better therapeutic outcomes when compared to empiric drug optimization and/or reactive TDM of infliximab and adalimumab in IBD. However, more data from well-designed prospective studies are needed to prove the benefit of TDM-based algorithms in real life clinical practice in IMID.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据