A genome-wide association study of anorexia nervosa.
; ; et al
in Molecular psychiatry (2014), 19(10), 1085-94
Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a complex and heritable eating disorder characterized by dangerously low body weight. Neither candidate gene studies nor an initial genome-wide association study (GWAS) have ... [more ▼]
Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a complex and heritable eating disorder characterized by dangerously low body weight. Neither candidate gene studies nor an initial genome-wide association study (GWAS) have yielded significant and replicated results. We performed a GWAS in 2907 cases with AN from 14 countries (15 sites) and 14 860 ancestrally matched controls as part of the Genetic Consortium for AN (GCAN) and the Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium 3 (WTCCC3). Individual association analyses were conducted in each stratum and meta-analyzed across all 15 discovery data sets. Seventy-six (72 independent) single nucleotide polymorphisms were taken forward for in silico (two data sets) or de novo (13 data sets) replication genotyping in 2677 independent AN cases and 8629 European ancestry controls along with 458 AN cases and 421 controls from Japan. The final global meta-analysis across discovery and replication data sets comprised 5551 AN cases and 21 080 controls. AN subtype analyses (1606 AN restricting; 1445 AN binge-purge) were performed. No findings reached genome-wide significance. Two intronic variants were suggestively associated: rs9839776 (P=3.01 x 10(-7)) in SOX2OT and rs17030795 (P=5.84 x 10(-6)) in PPP3CA. Two additional signals were specific to Europeans: rs1523921 (P=5.76 x 10(-)(6)) between CUL3 and FAM124B and rs1886797 (P=8.05 x 10(-)(6)) near SPATA13. Comparing discovery with replication results, 76% of the effects were in the same direction, an observation highly unlikely to be due to chance (P=4 x 10(-6)), strongly suggesting that true findings exist but our sample, the largest yet reported, was underpowered for their detection. The accrual of large genotyped AN case-control samples should be an immediate priority for the field. [less ▲]Detailed reference viewed: 15 (2 ULg)
Assessment of long-term safety and efficacy of etanercept in a 5-year extension study in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.
; ; et al
in Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2011 Mar-Apr (2011)Detailed reference viewed: 77 (4 ULg)
Biomarkers and personalised medicine in rheumatoid arthritis: a proposal for interactions between academia, industry and regulatory bodies.
; ; et al
in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2011), 70(10), 1713-8
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is one of the most appropriate conditions for the application of personalised medicine as a high degree of heterogeneity has been recognised, which remains to be explained. Such ... [more ▼]
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is one of the most appropriate conditions for the application of personalised medicine as a high degree of heterogeneity has been recognised, which remains to be explained. Such heterogeneity is also reflected in the large number of treatment targets and options. A growing number of biologics as well as small molecules are already in use and there are promising new drugs in development. In order to make the best use of treatment options, both targeted and non-targeted biomarkers have to be identified and validated. To this aim, new rules are needed for the interaction between academia and industry under regulatory control. Setting up multi-centre biosample collections with clear definition of access, organising early, possibly non-committing discussions with regulatory authorities, and defining a clear route for the validation, qualification and registration of the biomarker-drug combination are some of the more critical areas where effective collaboration between the drug industry, academia and regulators is needed. [less ▲]Detailed reference viewed: 88 (16 ULg)
A long-term, open-label trial of the safety and efficacy of etanercept (Enbrel) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis not treated with other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs
; ; et al
in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2006), 65(12), 1578-1584
Objective: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of etanercept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Methods: 549 patients entered this 5-year, open-label extension study and received etanercept ... [more ▼]
Objective: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of etanercept in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Methods: 549 patients entered this 5-year, open-label extension study and received etanercept 25 mg twice weekly. All patients showed inadequate responses to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs before entry into the double-blind studies. Safety assessments were carried out at regular intervals. Primary efficacy end points were the numbers of painful and swollen joints; secondary variables included American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response rate, Disease Activity Score and acute-phase reactants. Efficacy was analysed using the last-observation-carried-forward approach. Results: Of the 549 patients enrolled in the open-label trial, 467 (85%), 414 (75%) and 371 (68%) completed 1, 2 and 3 years, respectively; 363 (66%) remained in the study at the time of this analysis. A total exposure of 1498 patient-years, including the double-blind study, was accrued. In the open-label trial, withdrawals for efficacy-related and safety-related reasons were 11% and 13%, respectively. Frequent adverse events included upper respiratory infections, flu syndrome, rash and injection-site reactions. Rates of serious infections and malignancies remained unchanged over the course of the study; there were no reports of patients with central demyelinating disease or serious blood dyscrasias. After 3 years, ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70 response rates were 78%, 51% and 27%, respectively. The Disease Activity Score score was reduced to 3.0 at 3 months and 2.6 at 3 years from 5.1. A sustained improvement was found in Health Assessment Questionnaire scores throughout the 3-year time period. Conclusion: After 3 years of treatment, etanercept showed sustained efficacy and a favourable safety profile. [less ▲]Detailed reference viewed: 31 (1 ULg)
Therapeutic effect of the combination of etanercept and methotrexate compared with each treatment alone in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: double-blind randomised controlled trial
; ; et al
in Lancet (2004), 363(9410), 675-681
Background Etanercept and methotrexate are effective in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis but no data exist on concurrent initiation or use of the combination compared with either drug alone. We aimed ... [more ▼]
Background Etanercept and methotrexate are effective in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis but no data exist on concurrent initiation or use of the combination compared with either drug alone. We aimed to assess combination treatment with etanercept and methotrexate versus the monotherapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Methods In a double-blind, randomised, clinical efficacy, safety, and radiographic study, 686 patients with active rheumatoid arthritis were randomly allocated to treatment with etanercept 25 mg (subcutaneously twice a week), oral methotrexate (up to 20 mg every week), or the combination. Clinical response was assessed by criteria of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR). The primary efficacy endpoint was the numeric index of the ACR response (ACR-N) area under the curve (AUC) over the first 24 weeks. The primary radiographic endpoint was change from baseline to week 52 in total joint damage and was assessed with the modified Sharp score. Analysis was by intention to treat. Findings Four patients did not receive any drug; thus 682 were studied. ACR-N AUC at 24 weeks was greater for the combination group compared with etanercept alone and methotrexate alone (18.3% years [95% CI 17.1-19.6] vs 14.7%-years [13.5-16.0], p<0.0001, and 12.2%-years [11.0-13.4], p<0.0001; respectively). The mean difference in ACR-N AUC between combination and methotrexate alone was 6.1 (95% CI 4.5-7.8, p<0.0001) and between etanercept and methotrexate was 2.5 (0.8-4.2, p=0.0034). The combination was more efficacious than methotrexate or etanercept alone in retardation of joint damage (mean total Sharp score -0.54 [95% CI -1.00 to -0.07] vs 2.80 [1.08 to 4.51], p<0.0001, and 0.52 [-0.10 to 1.15], p=0.0006; respectively). The mean difference in total Sharp score between combination and methotrexate alone was -3.34 (95% CI -4.86 to -1.81, p<0.0001) and between etanercept and methotrexate was -2.27 (-3.81 to -0.74, p=0.0469). The number of patients reporting infections or adverse events was similar in all groups. Interpretation The combination of etanercept and methotrexate was significantly better in reduction of disease activity, improvement of functional disability, and retardation of radiographic progression compared with methotrexate or etanercept alone. These findings bring us closer to achievement of remission and repair of structural damage in rheumatoid arthritis. [less ▲]Detailed reference viewed: 40 (0 ULg)