Difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis (D2T RA) is a multifactorial condition in which disease activity of RA persists despite consecutive treatment with biological or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs). To evaluate the prevalence and predictive risk factors of D2T RA in our institution, a single-center, retrospective study was conducted. Medical records of RA patients, who visited our hospital from 2011 to 2020 and had a follow-up of more than 6 months, were retrospectively reviewed. D2T RA was defined as RA with a disease activity score of 28 – erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR) of 3.2 or higher at the last visit, despite the use of at least two b/tsDMARDs. A logistic regression model was used to identify risk factors. A total of 672 patients were enrolled. The mean age at disease onset was 52.1 years and females were dominant (76.3%). After a mean follow-up of 46.6 months, patients with D2T RA accounted for 7.9% of overall patients. Multivariate analysis identified high rheumatoid factor (RF) levels (≥156.4 IU/mL, odds ratio [OR]: 1.95), DAS28-ESR (OR: 1.24), and coexisting pulmonary disease (OR: 2.03) as predictive risk factors of D2T RA. In conclusion, high RF levels, high DAS28-ESR, and coexisting pulmonary disease at baseline can predict the development of D2T RA.

Introduction: B cell-activating factor of the tumor necrosis factor family (BAFF) and a proliferation-inducing ligand (APRIL) play a crucial role in B cell development, survival, and antibody production. Here we analyzed the serum levels of BAFF and APRIL and their respective clinical associations in patients with an immunoglobulin (Ig) G4-related disease (IgG4-RD). Methods: We measured serum levels of BAFF and APRIL in patients with IgG4-RD, primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS), and healthy individuals. Serum BAFF and APRIL levels in IgG4-RD were assessed for correlations with serological parameters, including Ig, particularly IgG4, and the number of affected organs. Serum BAFF and APRIL levels in IgG4-RD were monitored during glucocorticoid (GC) therapy. Results: Serum BAFF and APRIL levels in patients with IgG4-RD were significantly higher (P < 0.01) than in healthy individuals. The BAFF levels of patients with IgG4-RD were comparable to those of patients with pSS. Although clinical parameters, such as serum IgG4 and the number of affected organs, were not correlated with the levels of BAFF, serum APRIL levels were inversely correlated with serum IgG4 levels (r = -0.626, P < 0.05). While serum BAFF levels decreased following GC therapy, serum APRIL levels increased during follow-up. Conclusion: These results indicate that BAFF and APRIL might be useful markers for predicting disease activity in IgG4-RD. Further studies are needed to elucidate the role of BAFF and APRIL in the pathogenesis of IgG4-RD.

Objective Th17 has been shown to have a pivotal role in the development of arthritis. However, the role of IL-17 in the T cell-independent effector phase has not fully been examined. We investigated whether IL-17 is involved in the effector phase of arthritis by using K/BxN serum-induced arthritis model. Methods K/BxN serum was transferred into IL-17 knockout (KO) mice, SCID mice and their control mice, and arthritis was evaluated over time. In order to clarify the source of IL-17 in the effector phase, neutrophils or CD4+ T cells collected from IL-17 KO or control mice were injected into IL-17 KO recipient mice together with K/BxN serum. To examine if neutrophils secrete IL-17 upon stimulation, neutrophils were stimulated with immune complex in vitro and IL-17 in the supernatant was measured by ELISA. Results K/BxN serum-induced arthritis was much less severe in IL-17 KO mice than in WT mice. Since K/BxN serum-transferred SCID mice developed severe arthritis with high serum IL-17 concentration, we speculated neutrophils are the responsible player as an IL-17 source. When wild type (WT) but not IL-17 KO neutrophils were co-injected with K/BxN serum into IL-17 KO mice, arthritis was exacerbated, whereas co-injection of WT CD4+ T cells had no effect. In vitro, stimulation of neutrophils with immune complexcaused IL-17 secretion. Conclusions Neutrophils are essential as a source of IL-17 in the effector phase of arthritis. The trigger of secreting IL-17 from neutrophils may be immune complex.

Objectives. ACPA is a highly specific marker for RA. It was recently reported that ACPA can be used to classify RA into two disease subsets, ACPA-positive and ACPA-negative RA. ACPA-positive RA was found to be associated with the HLA-DR shared epitope (SE), but ACPA negative was not. However, the suspicion remained that this result was caused by the ACPA-negative RA subset containing patients with non-RA diseases. We examined whether this is the case even when possible non-RA ACPA-negative RA patients were excluded by selecting only patients with bone erosion. Methods. We genotyped HLA-DRB1 alleles for 574 ACPA-positive RA, 185 ACPA-negative RA (including 97 erosive RA) and 1508 healthy donors. We also tested whether HLA-DR SE is associated with RF-negative or ANA-negative RA. Results. ACPA-negative RA with apparent bone erosion was not associated with SE, supporting the idea that ACPA-negative RA is genetically distinct from ACPA-positive RA. We also tested whether these subsets are based on autoantibody-producing activity. In accordance with the ACPA-negative RA subset, the RF-negative RA subset showed a clearly distinct pattern of association with SE from the RF-positive RA. In contrast, ANA-negative as well as ANA-positive RA was similarly associated with SE, suggesting that the subsets distinguished by ACPA are not based simply on differences in autoantibody production. Conclusions. ACPA-negative erosive RA is genetically distinct from ACPA-positive RA.

Introduction: The induction of antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) or anti-double-stranded (ds) -DNA antibodies (Abs) after infliximab (IFX) therapy in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a well-known phenomenon, but the correlation of such Abs with the clinical response to IFX has not yet been determined. The aims of this retrospective observational study were to examine the prevalence of positive ANA and anti-ds-DNA Abs before and after IFX therapy in patients with RA and to investigate whether an increased titer of such Abs is associated with the clinical efficacy of IFX. Methods: One hundred eleven RA patients who had received IFX were studied. ANA (indirect immunofluorescence with HEp-2 cells) and anti-ds-DNA Abs (Farr assay) results were examined before and after IFX therapy. Results: The overall clinical response assessed by EULAR response criteria was as follows: good response in 55%, including remission in 38%; moderate response in 18%; and no response (NOR) in 27%. The positivity of ANA (≥ 1:160) and anti-ds-DNA Abs significantly increased from 25% to 40% (P = 0.03) and from 3% to 26% (P < 0.001) after IFX, respectively. EULAR response differed significantly according to the ANA titer before IFX (P = 0.001), and the efficacy of IFX became worse as the ANA titer before starting IFX increased. Furthermore, the differences in the clinical response of the ANA titer before IFX ≤ 1:80 and ≥ 1:160 were significant (good, moderate, and no response were 66%, 9%, and 25% in ≤ 1:80 group versus 26%, 33%, 41% in ≥ 1:160 group, respectively; P < 0.001). In 13 patients whose ANA had increased after IFX, 10 showed NOR, only one showed a good response, and none reached remission. These clinical responses were significantly different from ANA no-change patients. In 21 patients with positive anti-ds-DNA Abs after IFX, 16 showed NOR, only two showed a good response, and none reached remission. Conclusions: The present study suggests that the ANA titer before starting IFX predicts the clinical response to IFX. The increased titers of ANA or anti-ds-DNA Abs after IFX may be useful markers of NOR.

Following the advent of molecular targeted drugs, a paradigm shift in treatment similar to that in rheumatoid arthritis has been expected in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), but clinical trials for drugs that many specialists believed to be effective have failed repeatedly. The causes are not simple, but include the heterogeneity of SLE, inclusion criteria, lack of appropriate disease activity measures, and relapse criteria. This review outlines the disease activity indices used in SLE, discusses their advantages and disadvantages, and describes the ideal activity index.