Journals / art / 2021 / Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 1

Biologics in juvenile idiopathic arthritis-main advantages and major challenges: A narrative review

Journal
art
Pages
146–157
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Although the efficacy and safety of biological agents have been proven in different studies, there is still a need for long-term, multicentric evaluation providing relevant data.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common rheumatic disease in childhood.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Discovery and widespread usage of biological agents have led to significant improvement in JIA patients’ treatment, with evidently increased functionality and decreased disease sequel.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Although the efficacy and safety of biological agents have been proven in different studies, there is still a need for long-term, multicentric evaluation providing relevant data.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common rheumatic disease in childhood. The disease is divided in different subtypes based on main clinical features and disease course. Emergence of biological agents targeting specific pro-inflammatory cytokines responsible for the disease pathogenesis represents the revolution in the JIA treatment. Discovery and widespread usage of biological agents have led to significant improvement in JIA patients’ treatment, with evidently increased functionality and decreased disease sequel. Increased risk of infections remains the main discussion topic for years. Despite the slightly increased frequency of upper respiratory tract infections reported in some studies, the general safety of drugs is acceptable with rare reports of severe adverse effects (SAEs). Tuberculosis (TBC) represents the important threat in regions with increased TBC prevalence. Therefore, routine screening for TBC should not be neglected when prescribing and during the follow-up of biological treatment. Malignancy represents a hypothetical complication that sometimes causes hesitations for physicians and patients in its prescription and usage. On the other hand, current reports from the literature do not support the increased risk for malignancy among JIA patients treated with biological agents. A multidisciplinary approach including a pediatric rheumatologist and an infectious disease specialist is mandatory in the follow-up of JIA patients. Although the efficacy and safety of biological agents have been proven in different studies, there is still a need for long-term, multicentric evaluation providing relevant data.

🔖

Cite This Article

ADROVIC, A., YILDIZ, M., ÖKER, O., ŞAHİN, S., BARUT, K., KASAPÇOPUR, Ö. (2021). Biologics in juvenile idiopathic arthritis-main advantages and major challenges: A narrative review. art, Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 1, 146–157. https://ajindex.com/articles/351713

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Prakken B, Albani S, Martini A. Juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Lancet 2011;377:2138-49
  2. Barut K, Adrovic A, Şahin S, Kasapçopur Ö. Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis. Balkan Med J 2017;34:90-101
  3. Giancane G, Consolaro A, Lanni S, Davì S, Schiappapietra B, Ravelli A. Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Diagnosis and Treatment. Rheumatol Ther 2016;3:187-207
  4. Aslan M, Kasapcopur O, Yasar H, Polat E, Saribas S, Cakan H, et al. Do infections trigger juvenile idiopathic arthritis? Rheumatol Int 2011;31:215-20
  5. Petty RE, Southwood TR, Manners P, Baum J, Glass DN, Goldenberg J, et al. International League of Associations for Rheumatology classification of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: second revision, Edmonton, 2001. J Rheumatol 2004;31:390-2
  6. Gowdie PJ, Tse SM. Juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Pediatr Clin North Am 2012;59:301-27
  7. Weiss JE, Ilowite NT. Juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Pediatr Clin North Am 2005;52:413-42, vi
  8. Ravelli A, Martini A. Juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Lancet 2007;369:767-78
  9. Ozen S, Karaaslan Y, Ozdemir O, Saatci U, Bakkaloglu A, Koroglu E, et al. Prevalence of juvenile chronic arthritis and familial Mediterranean fever in Turkey: a field study. J Rheumatol 1998;25:2445-9
  10. Manners PJ, Diepeveen DA. Prevalence of juvenile chronic arthritis in a population of 12-year-old children in urban Australia. Pediatrics 1996;98:84-90
  11. Verwoerd A, Ter Haar NM, de Roock S, Vastert SJ, Bogaert D. The human microbiome and juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Pediatr Rheumatol Online J 2016;14:55
  12. Zhou J, Ding Y, Zhang Y, Feng Y, Tang X, Zhao X. CD3+CD56+ natural killer T cell activity in children with different forms of juvenile idiopathic arthritis and the influence of etanercept treatment on polyarticular subgroup. Clin Immunol 2017;176:1-11
  13. Kasapçopur Ö, Barut K. Treatment in juvenile rheumatoid arthritis and new treatment options. Turk Pediatri Ars 2015;50:1-10
  14. Hügle B, Horneff G. The role of synthetic drugs in the biologic era: therapeutic strategies for treating juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2016;17:703-14
  15. Makay B, Unsal E, Kasapcopur O. Juvenile idiopathic arthritis. WJR World 2013;3:16-24
  16. Ayaz NA, Karadağ ŞG, Çakmak F, Çakan M, Tanatar A, Sönmez HE. Leflunomide treatment in juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Rheumatol Int 2019;39:1615-9
  17. Otten MH, Prince FH, Armbrust W, ten Cate R, Hoppenreijs EP, Twilt M, et al. Factors associated with treatment response to etanercept in juvenil