Next Article in Journal
Adverse Clinical Outcomes among Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients Treated for Urinary Tract Infection
Next Article in Special Issue
Strategy and Challenges of Paraclinical Examinations in Adult-Onset Still’s Disease
Previous Article in Journal
Dark Adaptation and Its Role in Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Role of Interleukin 18/Interleukin 18-Binding Protein in Adult-Onset Still’s Disease and Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Viewpoint

Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis/Pediatric Still’s Disease, a Syndrome but Several Clinical Forms: Recent Therapeutic Approaches

by
Pierre Quartier
1,2
1
Unité d’Immunologie-Hématologie et Rhumatologie Pédiatrique, RAISE Reference Centre, Hôpital Necker-Enfants Malades, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 149 Rue de Sèvres, 75015 Paris, France
2
INSERM 1231, Université de Paris, 45 Rue des Saints-Pères, 75006 Paris, France
J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(5), 1357; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11051357
Submission received: 5 January 2022 / Revised: 18 February 2022 / Accepted: 26 February 2022 / Published: 1 March 2022

Abstract

:
Background: Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (SJIA)/Pediatric Still’s disease is associated with different phenotypes and outcomes from currently available treatments. Methods: A review of opinion, based on personal experience in a reference pediatric rheumatology center and key publications, to explore the most important questions regarding disease heterogeneity and treatment approaches. Results: A few situations deserve particular attention: 1/patients with recent-onset SJIA who may benefit from a treat-to-target approach with a key place for interleukin (IL)-1 inhibition; 2/SJIA patients refractory to Il-1 and IL-6 antagonists in whom several options may be discussed, including thalidomide or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; 3/SJIA patients with macrophage activation syndrome who may benefit from both well-used classical treatment and innovative approaches, such as anti-interferon gamma therapy or Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors; 4/SJIA with severe lung involvement, 5/SJIA patients who achieve complete remission on treatment, with some recent evidence that treatment may be reduced in intensity but not so easily withdrawn. Conclusions: a case-by-case discussion with expert teams is recommended in this heterogeneous, often difficult-to-treat population of patients.

1. Introduction

Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (SJIA) is defined according to the current International League of Associations for Rheumatology (ILAR) as a disease starting before the age of 16 years, active for at least 6 weeks, with at least 15 days of fever, a peculiar spiking fever pattern, arthritis, and at least 2 of the following features: skin rash, serositis (pericarditis in most cases), lymphadenopathy, hepatomegaly, or splenomegaly [1]. More recently, less stringent diagnosis criteria were proposed to allow earlier diagnosis and treatment [2]. These new diagnosis criteria are undergoing a validation process. A provisional diagnosis of SJIA could be made after two weeks in a patient with typical systemic features and arthralgia, even in the absence of arthritis.
The pathogenesis of SJIA is complex, with an autoinflammatory presentation involving proinflammatory cytokines such as interleukin (IL)-1 and Il-6, a risk of life-threatening macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) in some patients also involving other cytokines, such as interferon gamma and IL-18 [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]. In addition, there is a strong association of disease susceptibility and severity with the Human Leucocyte Antigen (HLA) DRB1 region [11,12,13,14]. There is a continuum with Adult-Onset Still’s Disease (AoSD), which diagnosis can be made in patients without arthritis [15,16]. In both SJIA and AoSD, some patients develop life-threatening complications such as MAS or secondary amyloidosis [17]. In addition, a subset of patients develops severe interstitial lung disease, alveolar proteinosis, and/or pulmonary hypertension [18,19].
Methotrexate and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists are not as effective as in non-systemic JIA [20,21]. Long-lasting corticosteroid therapy is associated with many complications, including growth failure in children. Therefore, there has been over the last year an increased usage of IL-1 and -6 antagonists, which have proven efficacious in controlling disease activity in most patients and allowing a substantial proportion of them to achieve inactive disease [22,23,24,25]. However, in the setting of clinical trials, stopping an effective biologic treatment in patients with clinical remission off steroids resulted in disease reactivation within a few months [26]. In some cases, the Il-1 receptor antagonist anakinra has been introduced in corticosteroid-naïve patients, after only a few weeks of disease duration, in an intention-to-treat approach [27]. More recently, phase III trials of the Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors, tofacitinib and baricitinib, have been initiated (NCT03000439 and NCT04088396).
SJIA is a syndrome rather than a disease, with some typical clinical features but very variable severity, outcomes, and variable responses to treatments. Peculiar gene expression signatures have been evidenced that distinguish SJIA from other diseases [3,22]. However, apart from a few cases, there is no underlying genetic abnormality. Importantly, recent efforts may allow the distinction of some subpopulations of SJIA patients who are at higher risk of severe complications and may deserve specific therapeutic approaches.
The author proposes to give his understanding of some key differences between different subpopulations of SJIA patients and their implications for patients’ prognosis and treatment.

2. Materials and Methods

This work is based on the author’s personal experience over 20 years in the fields of pediatric rheumatology, as the coordinator of a pediatric rheumatology team from a National reference center for rare pediatric inflammatory rheumatic diseases (RAISE, France) with a cohort of more than 200 SJIA patients, and from his knowledge of other experts’ experience, through regular case discussions, and of the literature.

3. Results

3.1. General Understanding of the Problematic Situations

Several publications emphasize that some situations in SJIA patients deserve peculiar attention [5,18,19,26,27]:
-
diagnosis and treatment of recent-onset SJIA;
-
treatment of patients with long-lasting auto-inflammatory symptoms who do not respond adequately to the most usual treatments;
-
treatment of patients with diffuse, severe, erosive polyarthritis;
-
treatment of patients with SJIA and macrophage activation syndrome (MAS), and in particular patients with remitting–relapsing MAS;
-
recognition and treatment of a subset of SJIA patients who may develop severe lung involvement, many of them having previously developed MAS;
-
tapering and/or withdrawing treatment in patients who achieve complete remission
Table 1 and Table 2 indicate some of the main questions (Table 1) and the classical versus more recent therapeutic approaches (Table 2) in several situations.
The differential diagnosis is particularly complex in the early phases of the disease, particularly with Kawasaki disease and post-Covid19 multisystem inflammatory syndrome [28].

3.2. Diagnosis and Treatment of Very Recent-Onset SJIA

Before the era of anti-IL-1 and anti-IL-6 targeted biologics, more than 50% of SJIA patients developed a chronic, severe disease, with persistent inflammation and erosive polyarthritis in most cases. On the other hand, between 15 and 40% of patients with a diagnosis of SJIA were reported to have a monocyclic disease course, or at least a complete remission after some weeks or months of active disease; the follow-up in these patients could last from three months to several years after remission [29,30,31,32].
Using the most recent diagnosis criteria, which allow a provisional diagnosis of SJIA to be made after two or three weeks of disease, even in the absence of arthritis [2], we may well select a subgroup of “SJIA” patients at lower risk of having a long-lasting, chronic course. A significant proportion of such patients may just have a post-infectious reactive disease that mimics SJIA at its onset but will vanish after a few weeks.
In the last few years, pediatric rheumatologists from Utrecht (NZ) and other places have hypothesized that there is a window of opportunity at the earliest phase of SJIA: at this stage, using an Il-1 inhibitor to treat steroid-naive patients would allow, in most cases, fast and complete remission, and prevent chronic inflammatory disease to develop [27]. Some authors suggested that such an approach should be considered within the first six weeks to three months of the disease [33,34,35]. Recent recommendations are in favor of a treat-to-target approach in JIA in general [36] and SJIA in particular [37], with very ambitious targets such as achieving control of fever and marked reduction of CRP level within one week, complete remission off steroids after some months; this has also stimulated a very active therapeutic approach of patients suspected of SJIA at an early phase of the disease, with often a very early introduction of the anti-IL-1 receptor antagonist anakinra.
The most recently published results from the team of Utrecht indicate that 12 out of 12 patients with no arthritis and 20 out of 30 with arthritis at anakinra onset achieved complete remission that persisted with the patient off treatment after 12 months and in most cases after 5 years [27]. Anakinra had been stopped in median after slightly more than three months.
Taking into account the absence of a control group and/or a randomization process, we do not know, in fact, if:
-
early anakinra treatment indeed modified the disease course in a significant proportion of patients, preventing diffuse, chronic polyarthritis and a long-lasting disease course;
-
or if some of these patients, particularly those who never developed arthritis, presented a less severe SJIA subtype (if not another disease) that would anyway have had a monocyclic course.
In the author’s, and many experts’, opinion, in patients with a provisional diagnosis of SJIA, early IL-1 blockade is an interesting approach. It certainly reduces the use of steroids [27,38]. It allows clinicians to meet more easily the most recent treat-to-target objectives [37]. It may also be valuable from a medico-economic point of view [39]. However, as with any major therapeutic decision in SJIA patients, a case-by-case discussion with an expert team is recommended. In particular, steroids remain important, possibly in association with anakinra, another biologic or a small molecule, in treating patients with an underlying SAM or early arthritis (Table 2). Patients with early arthritis may also benefit from early introduction of anti-IL-6 therapy, as anakinra may be less consistently effective in these cases [27]. Tocilizumab was also shown to be more efficient in such patients when started early and before the arthritis has spread to many joints [40]. Finally, although we lack reliable biomarkers to choose the best first line treatment, several polymorphisms in the IL1RN gene may be at risk of non-response to anakinra [35,41,42]. In addition, SJIA patients with very high IL-1 and IL-18 levels, particularly in cases of early-onset SJIA and SAM, might be good candidates for new therapeutic approaches, such as JAK inhibitors or other more experimental treatments targeting the interferon (IFN) gamma and/or IL-18 axis. In such patients, there is a high risk of non-response to treatments and life-threatening complications. Hence, they deserve a very tight follow-up, and even allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) may be worth considering in some cases, at a relatively early stage of the disease. This will be discussed in Section 3.6.

3.3. SJIA with Long-Lasting, Difficult-to-Treat, Inflammatory Disease

IL-1 and IL-6 antagonists have proven efficacy in most SJIA patients who would in the past have developed long-lasting inflammation and fail to adequately respond to methotrexate or other biologics such as TNF alpha antagonists. However, some patients either do not respond to, or escape symptomatic disease on anakinra, canakinumab or tocilizumab therapy. In patients who failed to respond to a TNF alpha antagonist, the response rate to anakinra seems good [43]; in patients who failed to achieve inactive disease on a first anti-IL-1 or Il-6 treatment, a significant proportion but not all patients eventually achieve inactive disease on a second or third-line biologic, either anti-IL-1 (mainly canakinumab in patients who did not respond well to anakinra or tocilizumab) or anti-IL-6 (tocilizumab in patients who did not respond well or escaped to anakinra and/or canakinumab) [25].
In patients with persistent auto-inflammation plus/minus arthritis, other options to discuss include JAK-inhibitors, thalidomide and, in a very few selected cases, allogeneic HSCT (Table 2) [44,45,46].

3.4. SJIA with Refractory Polyarthritis

SJIA patients with diffuse polyarthritis are among the most difficult to treat. Among currently available treatments, the best evidence-based medicine is for tocilizumab [24]. However, for the patients who do not respond well to IL-1 and Il-6 antagonists, the probability to achieve inactive or nearly inactive disease on any other drug and no or low-dose steroids is low. In this situation, it might be worth to test other biologics such as TNF inhibitors or abatacept in combination with methotrexate and, if needed, low-dose steroids. In some patients we used a combination of thalidomide and a TNF inhibitor (unpublished) with some good responders but only in a very few patients. The experience with JAK inhibitors in such patients is very recent. Again, in few selected cases, allogeneic HSCT has to be discussed (Table 2).

3.5. SJIA and Macrophage Activation Syndrome (MAS)

In patients with SJIA features and MAS at disease onset, several diseases have to be ruled out (Table 1). Even though MAS requires to be treated urgently in most case, having a few milliliters of blood sampled on EDTA at room temperature before starting high-dose steroids is important to allow proper lymphocyte phenotyping and analysis of the proportion of activated T cells; a high percentage of highly activated T cells is not in favor of SJIA-associated MAS but rather of primary hemophagocytosis such as familial lymphohistiocytosis or other rare conditions. Other analyses would then be performed such as studying the expression of perforin.
High-dose steroids remain the first line treatment in such patients to control MAS, however, adding other immuno-modulatory treatments has to be considered in most cases. Cyclosporine and, in life-threatening MAS, etoposide are the most classical treatments [47,48,49]. In patients who develop MAS after inappropriate discontinuation of an active SJIA treatment, such as tocilizumab or anakinra, reintroducing the active drug together with high-dose steroids must be considered. Of note, the diagnosis of MAS may be more challenging on anti-IL-6 treatment [50]. Some authors even propose the use of high-dose anakinra, in some cases intravenously, to treat MAS in the context of active SJIA activity [51]. On the other hand, several works are in favor of a major implication of IFNγ in SJIA-associated MAS [5,6,7]. The anti-IFNγ antibody, emapalumab, is being tested in this indication following its development in primary hemophagocytosis [52]; emapalumab seems active on MAS, however controlling associated SJIA activity requires additional therapy in most cases, including anakinra [53]. Targeting Il-18 may also be of interest in some patients [9,10]. There is an ongoing trial with a biclonal anti-IL-1/IL-18 antibody in patients with an NLRC4 gain of function mutation, a rare autoinflammatory disease; such an approach might be also of interest in SJIA patients with MAS.
JAK inhibitors look promising as these drugs may be active on both SJIA activity and MAS [54,55,56]. In particular, in patients with remitting–relapsing MAS, we would at the moment privilege this treatment.
As for patients with primary hemophagocytosis, intractable MAS may lead to the proposal of allogeneic HSCT in a few SJIA patients [46].

3.6. SJIA at Risk of Life-Threatening Chronic Lung Disease

A subset of SJIA patients develop chronic, life-threatening lung disease including interstitial lung disease, pulmonary hypertension and alveolar proteinosis [18,19]. No underlying genetic abnormality has been found in these patients, however most of them have early-onset SJIA, permanently high serum IL-1 and IL-18 levels, a poor response to biologics and more hypersensitivity reactions to tocilizumab. The authors of the main publications suspect that macrophage dysfunction may be part of this severe outcome. We do not know if a less systematic usage of steroids at disease onset is responsible for a seemingly increased incidence of such severe lung involvement; the possible implication of environmental factors is also not clear. IFNγ has been reported to be essential for alveolar macrophage-driven pulmonary inflammation in macrophage activation syndrome [5,7]. A few case reports suggest that JAK inhibitors might be of interest in such patients [56].

3.7. Tapering and/or Withdrawing Treatment in SJIA Patients Who Achieve Complete Remission

In the Utrecht experience, most patients who received anakinra treatment at a very early stage of the disease were able to stop anakinra after 3.5 months in median and remained in remission, off steroids with a median follow-up of more than 5 years [27]. However, as indicated in Section 3.2, in the absence of any control group and in the absence of arthritis in a significant proportion of these patients with a “provisional diagnosis” of SJIA, it is not possible to know if there is a window of opportunity to avoid a chronic disease to develop, or if the patients with a favorable outcome had a reactive systemic disease instead of true SJIA or were just prone to have a monocyclic course.
In patients who achieved complete remission on the anti-IL-1 antibody canakinumab, which had been started two years in median after SJIA onset, a randomized controlled trial showed that most patients could reduce treatment intensity either by reducing the dosage from 4 to 2 and then 1 mg/kg per injection or by giving less frequent injections, up to 1 injection every 12 weeks; however, following canakinumab withdrawal, most patients experienced disease reactivation within 6 months, suggesting that a certain level of Il-1 inhibition might be required in such patients in the long term [26].
The experience with other drugs is much more limited and we clearly miss biomarkers to better predict which patients could stop treatment once they achieve complete remission, and which patients are at risk of flare-ups of disease.

4. Conclusions

SJIA remains a very complex, heterogeneous, difficult-to-treat condition in many patients, particularly those with long-lasting systemic disease and/or erosive polyarthritis, who do not respond well to Il-1 and Il-6 antagonists, and those with remitting–relapsing MAS. The risk of severe lung involvement in a subset of patients deserve particular attention. A case-by-case discussion with expert teams is recommended to properly diagnose and treat these patients, with some promising recent treatment such as JAK inhibitors or, in selected cases, of allogeneic HSCT, that deserve further investigation.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable for this viewpoint, which is not a study involving subjects.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable for this viewpoint, which is not a study involving subjects.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable as this viewpoint is not a study reporting data.

Conflicts of Interest

The author received consultancy or speaking fees from AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai-Roche, Lilly, Novartis, Novimmune, Pfizer and Swedish Orphan Biovitrum; and participated in a data safety monitoring board for Sanofi.

References

  1. Petty, R.E.; Southwood, T.R.; Manners, P.; Baum, J.; Glass, D.N.; Goldenberg, J.; He, X.; Maldonado-Cocco, J.; Orozco-Alcala, J.; Prieur, A.-M.; et al. International League of Associations for Rheumatology classification of juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Second revision, Edmonton, 2001. J. Rheumatol. 2004, 31, 390–392. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  2. Martini, A.; Ravelli, A.; Avcin, T.; Beresford, M.W.; Burgos-Vargas, R.; Cuttica, R.; Ilowite, N.T.; Khubchandani, R.; Laxer, R.M.; Lovell, D.J.; et al. Toward New Classification Criteria for Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: First Steps, Pediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organization International Consensus. J. Rheumatol. 2019, 46, 190–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Allantaz, F.; Chaussabel, D.; Stichweh, D.; Bennett, L.; Allman, W.; Mejias, A.; Ardura, M.; Chung, W.; Smith, E.; Wise, C.; et al. Blood leukocyte microarrays to diagnose systemic onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis and follow the response to IL-1 blockade. J. Exp. Med. 2007, 204, 2131–2144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Pardeo, M.; Bracaglia, C.; De Benedetti, F. Systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: New insights into pathogenesis and cytokine directed therapies. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Rheumatol. 2017, 31, 505–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Erkens, R.; Esteban, Y.; Towe, C.; Schulert, G.; Vastert, S. Pathogenesis and Treatment of Refractory Disease Courses in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Refractory Arthritis, Recurrent Macrophage Activation Syndrome and Chronic Lung Disease. Rheum. Dis. Clin. N. Am. 2021, 47, 585–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Avau, A.; Mitera, T.; Put, S.; Put, K.; Brisse, E.; Filtjens, J.; Uyttenhove, C.; Van Snick, J.; Liston, A.; Leclercq, G.; et al. Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis-like Syndrome in Mice Following Stimulation of the Immune System With Freund’s Complete Adjuvant: Regulation by Interferon-γ. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014, 66, 1340–1351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Gao, D.K.; Salomonis, N.; Henderlight, M.; Woods, C.; Thakkar, K.; Grom, A.A.; Thornton, S.; Jordan, M.B.; Wikenheiser-Brokamp, K.A.; Schulert, G.S. IFN-γ is essential for alveolar macrophage–driven pulmonary inflammation in macrophage activation syndrome. JCI Insight 2021, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Mizuta, M.; Shimizu, M.; Inoue, N.; Nakagishi, Y.; Yachie, A. Clinical significance of serum CXCL9 levels as a biomarker for systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis associated macrophage activation syndrome. Cytokine 2019, 119, 182–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Shimizu, M.; Nakagishi, Y.; Inoue, N.; Mizuta, M.; Ko, G.; Saikawa, Y.; Kubota, T.; Yamasaki, Y.; Takei, S.; Yachie, A. Interleukin-18 for predicting the development of macrophage activation syndrome in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Clin. Immunol. 2015, 160, 277–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yasin, S.; Fall, N.; Brown, R.; Henderlight, M.; Canna, S.W.; Girard-Guyonvarc’h, C.; Gabay, C.; Grom, A.A.; Schulert, G.S. IL-18 as a biomarker linking systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis and macrophage activation syndrome. Rheumatology 2019, 59, 361–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ombrello, M.J.; Remmers, E.F.; Tachmazidou, I.; Grom, A.; Foell, D.; Haas, J.-P.; Martini, A.; Gattorno, M.; Özen, S.; Prahalad, S.; et al. HLA-DRB1*11 and variants of the MHC class II locus are strong risk factors for systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 15970–15975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Nigrovic, P.A. Autoinflammation and autoimmunity in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 15785–15786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Nigrovic, P.A.; Martínez-Bonet, M.; Thompson, S.D. Implications of juvenile idiopathic arthritis genetic risk variants for disease pathogenesis and classification. Curr. Opin. Rheumatol. 2019, 31, 401–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Saper, V.E.; Ombrello, M.J.; Tremoulet, A.H.; Montero-Martin, G.; Prahalad, S.; Canna, S.; Shimizu, C.; Deutsch, G.; Tan, S.Y.; Remmers, E.F.; et al. Severe delayed hypersensitivity reactions to IL-1 and IL-6 inhibitors link to common HLA-DRB1*15 alleles. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Yamaguchi, M.; Ohta, A.; Tsunematsu, T.; Kasukawa, R.; Mizushima, Y.; Kashiwagi, H.; Kashiwazaki, S.; Tanimoto, K.; Matsumoto, Y.; Ota, T. Preliminary criteria for classification of adult Still’s disease. J. Rheumatol. 1992, 19, 424–430. [Google Scholar]
  16. Vastert, S.J.; Jamilloux, Y.; Quartier, P.; Ohlman, S.; Koskinen, L.O.; Kullenberg, T.; Franck-Larsson, K.; Fautrel, B.; De Benedetti, F. Anakinra in children and adults with Still’s disease. Rheumatology 2019, 58 (Suppl. 6), vi9–vi22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Woo, P. Systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Diagnosis, management, and outcome. Nat. Clin. Pract. Rheumatol. 2006, 2, 28–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Schulert, G.S.; Yasin, S.; Carey, B.; Chalk, C.; Do, T.; Schapiro, A.H.; Husami, A.; Watts, A.; Brunner, H.I.; Huggins, J.; et al. Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis–Associated Lung Disease: Characterization and Risk Factors. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019, 71, 1943–1954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Saper, V.E.; Chen, G.; Deutsch, G.; Guillerman, R.P.; Birgmeier, J.; Jagadeesh, K.; Canna, S.; Schulert, G.; Deterding, R.; Xu, J.; et al. Emergent high fatality lung disease in systemic juvenile arthritis. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2019, 78, 1722–1731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Quartier, P.; Taupin, P.; Bourdeaut, F.; Lemelle, I.; Pillet, P.; Bost, M.; Sibilia, J.; Koné-Paut, I.; Gandon-Laloum, S.; Lebideau, M.; et al. Efficacy of etanercept for the treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis according to the onset type. Arthritis Care Res. 2003, 48, 1093–1101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Horneff, G.; Schmeling, H.; Biedermann, T.; Foeldvari, I.; Ganser, G.; Girschick, H.J.; Hospach, T.; Huppertz, H.I.; Keitzer, R.; Küster, R.M.; et al. The German etanercept registry for treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2004, 63, 1638–1644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Quartier, P.; Allantaz, F.; Cimaz, R.; Pillet, P.; Messiaen, C.; Bardin, C.; Bossuyt, X.; Boutten, A.; Bienvenu, J.; Duquesne, A.; et al. A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with the interleukin-1 receptor antagonist anakinra in patients with systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis (ANAJIS trial). Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2010, 70, 747–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Ruperto, N.; Brunner, H.I.; Quartier, P.; Constantin, T.; Wulffraat, N.; Horneff, G.; Brik, R.; McCann, L.; Kasapcopur, O.; Rutkowska-Sak, L.; et al. Two Randomized Trials of Canakinumab in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2012, 367, 2396–2406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. De Benedetti, F.; Brunner, H.I.; Ruperto, N.; Kenwright, A.; Wright, S.; Calvo, I.; Cuttica, R.; Ravelli, A.; Schneider, R.; Woo, P.; et al. Randomized Trial of Tocilizumab in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2012, 367, 2385–2395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Woerner, A.; Uettwiller, F.; Melki, I.; Mouy, R.; Wouters, C.; Bader-Meunier, B.; Quartier, P. Biological treatment in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Achievement of inactive disease or clinical remission on a first, second or third biological agent. RMD Open 2015, 1, e000036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Quartier, P.; Alexeeva, E.; Constantin, T.; Chasnyk, V.; Wulffraat, N.; Palmblad, K.; Wouters, C.; Brunner, H.I.; Marzan, K.; Schneider, R.; et al. Tapering Canakinumab Monotherapy in Patients With Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis in Clinical Remission: Results From a Phase IIIb/IV Open-Label, Randomized Study. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020, 73, 336–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ter Haar, N.M.; Van Dijkhuizen, E.H.P.; Swart, J.F.; Van Royen-Kerkhof, A.; El Idrissi, A.; Leek, A.P.; De Jager, W.; De Groot, M.C.H.; Haitjema, S.; Holzinger, D.; et al. Treatment to Target Using Recombinant Interleukin-1 Receptor Antagonist as First-Line Monotherapy in New-Onset Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Results From a Five-Year Follow-Up Study. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019, 71, 1163–1173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Kanemasa, H.; Nanishi, E.; Takada, H.; Ishimura, M.; Nishio, H.; Honjo, S.; Masuda, H.; Nagai, N.; Nishihara, T.; Ishii, T.; et al. Overlapping Features in Kawasaki Disease-Related Arthritis and Systemic-Onset Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: A Nationwide Study in Japan. Front. Pediatr. 2021, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Calabro, J.J.; Holgerson, W.B.; Sonpal, G.M.; Khoury, M.I. Juvenile Rheumatoid Arthritis: A general review and report of 100 patients observed for 15 years. Semin. Arthritis Rheum. 1976, 5, 257–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lomater, C.; Gerloni, V.; Gattinara, M.; Mazzotti, J.; Cimaz, R.; Fantini, F. Systemic onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis: A retrospective study of 80 consecutive patients followed for 10 years. J. Rheumatol. 2000, 27, 491–496. [Google Scholar]
  31. Fantini, F.; Gerloni, V.; Gattinara, M.; Cimaz, R.; Arnoldi, C.; Lupi, E. Remission in juvenile chronic arthritis: A cohort study of 683 consecutive cases with a mean 10 year followup. J. Rheumatol. 2003, 30, 579–584. [Google Scholar]
  32. Singh-Grewal, D.; Schneider, R.; Bayer, N.; Feldman, B.M. Predictors of disease course and remission in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Significance of early clinical and laboratory features. Arthritis Care Res. 2006, 54, 1595–1601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Saccomanno, B.; Tibaldi, J.; Minoia, F.; Bagnasco, F.; Pistorio, A.; Guariento, A.; Caorsi, R.; Consolaro, A.; Gattorno, M.; Ravelli, A. Predictors of Effectiveness of Anakinra in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis. J. Rheumatol. 2019, 46, 416–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Sota, J.; Rigante, D.; Ruscitti, P.; Insalaco, A.; Sfriso, P.; De Vita, S.; Cimaz, R.; Lopalco, G.; Emmi, G.; La Torre, F.; et al. Anakinra Drug Retention Rate and Predictive Factors of Long-Term Response in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis and Adult Onset Still Disease. Front. Pharmacol. 2019, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Pardeo, M.; Rossi, M.N.; Marafon, D.P.; Sacco, E.; Bracaglia, C.; Passarelli, C.; Caiello, I.; Marucci, G.; Insalaco, A.; Perrone, C.; et al. Early Treatment and IL1RN Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms Affect Response to Anakinra in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2020, 73, 1053–1061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ravelli, A.; Consolaro, A.; Horneff, G.; Laxer, R.M.; Lovell, D.J.; Wulffraat, N.M.; Akikusa, J.D.; Al-Mayouf, S.; Anton, J.; Avcin, T.; et al. Treating juvenile idiopathic arthritis to target: Recommendations of an international task force. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2018, 77, 819–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Hinze, C.H.; Holzinger, D.; Lainka, E.; Haas, J.-P.; Speth, F.; Kallinich, T.; Rieber, N.; Hufnagel, M.; Jansson, A.F.; Hedrich, C.; et al. Practice and consensus-based strategies in diagnosing and managing systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis in Germany. Pediatr. Rheumatol. 2018, 16, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Peterson, R.G.; Xiao, R.; Katcoff, H.; Fisher, B.T.; Weiss, P.F. Effect of first-line biologic initiation on glucocorticoid exposure in children hospitalized with new-onset systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Emulation of a pragmatic trial using observational data. Pediatr. Rheumatol. 2021, 19, 109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Bullement, A.; Knowles, E.S.; Langenfeld, M.; Diogo, G.R.; Nazir, J.; Eriksson, D. An Economic Comparison of Treatment Strategies with Anakinra in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (sJIA). Open Access Rheumatol. 2021, 13, 257–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Yan, X.; Tang, W.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Luo, C.; Tang, X. Tocilizumab in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Response Differs by Disease Duration at Medication Initiation and by Phenotype of Disease. Front. Pediatr. 2021, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Arthur, V.L.; Shuldiner, E.; Remmers, E.F.; Hinks, A.; Grom, A.A.; Foell, D.; Martini, A.; Gattorno, M.; Ozen, S.; Prahalad, S.; et al. IL1RN Variation Influences Both Disease Susceptibility and Response to Recombinant Human Interleukin-1 Receptor Antagonist Therapy in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2018, 70, 1319–1330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Hinze, C.; Fuehner, S.; Kessel, C.; Wittkowski, H.; Lainka, E.; Baehr, M.; Hügle, B.; Haas, J.; Ganser, G.; Weißbarth-Riedel, E.; et al. Impact of IL1RN Variants on Response to Interleukin-1 Blocking Therapy in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019, 72, 499–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Ntam, V.A.; Klein, A.; Horneff, G. Safety and efficacy of anakinra as first-line or second-line therapy for systemic onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis—Data from the German BIKER registry. Expert Opin. Drug Saf. 2020, 20, 93–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Silva, J.M.F.; Ladomenou, F.; Carpenter, B.; Chandra, S.; Sedlacek, P.; Formankova, R.; Grandage, V.; Friswell, M.; Cant, A.J.; Nademi, Z.; et al. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for severe, refractory juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Blood Adv. 2018, 2, 777–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Morelle, G.; Castelle, M.; Pinto, G.; Breton, S.; Bendavid, M.; Boussard, C.; Mouy, R.; Bader-Meunier, B.; Semeraro, M.; Faye, A.; et al. Sustained remission after haploidentical bone marrow transplantation in a child with refractory systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Pediatr. Rheumatol. 2021, 19, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Davidson, N.; Rangarajan, H.G.; Driest, K.; Bajwa, R.P.S.; Polishchuk, V.; Abu-Arja, R.F. Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant for Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis and Macrophage Activation Syndrome. Case Rep. Rheumatol. 2021, 2021, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Minoia, F.; Davì, S.; Horne, A.; Demirkaya, E.; Bovis, F.; Li, C.; Lehmberg, K.; Weitzman, S.; Insalaco, A.; Wouters, C.; et al. Clinical Features, Treatment, and Outcome of Macrophage Activation Syndrome Complicating Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: A Multinational, Multicenter Study of 362 Patients. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014, 66, 3160–3169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Boom, V.; Anton, J.; Lahdenne, P.; Quartier, P.; Ravelli, A.; Wulffraat, N.; Vastert, S. Evidence-based diagnosis and treatment of macrophage activation syndrome in systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Pediatr. Rheumatol. Online J. 2015, 13, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Horne, A.; Greenwood, T.V.B.; Chiang, S.C.; Meeths, M.; Björklund, C.; Ekelund, M.; Erensjö, P.; Berg, S.; Hagelberg, S.; Bryceson, Y.T.; et al. Efficacy of Moderately Dosed Etoposide in Macrophage Activation Syndrome–Hemophagocytic Lymphohistiocytosis. J. Rheumatol. 2021, 48, 1596–1602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Shimizu, M.; Mizuta, M.; Okamoto, N.; Yasumi, T.; Iwata, N.; Umebayashi, H.; Okura, Y.; Kinjo, N.; Kubota, T.; Nakagishi, Y.; et al. Tocilizumab modifies clinical and laboratory features of macrophage activation syndrome complicating systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Pediatr. Rheumatol. 2020, 18, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Phadke, O.; Rouster-Stevens, K.; Giannopoulos, H.; Chandrakasan, S.; Prahalad, S. Intravenous administration of anakinra in children with macrophage activation syndrome. Pediatr. Rheumatol. 2021, 19, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Locatelli, F.; Jordan, M.B.; Allen, C.; Cesaro, S.; Rizzari, C.; Rao, A.; Degar, B.; Garrington, T.P.; Sevilla, J.; Putti, M.-C.; et al. Emapalumab in Children with Primary Hemophagocytic Lymphohistiocytosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 1811–1822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. De Benedetti, F.; Grom, A.A.; Brogan, P.; Bracaglia, C.; Pardeo, M.; Marucci, G.; Eleftheriou, D.; Papadopoulou, C.; Quartier, P. Macrophage Activation Syndrome (MAS) in Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (sJIA): Treatment with Emapalumab, an Anti-Interferon Gamma (IFNγ) Monoclonal Antibody. Blood 2021, 138, 2058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Canna, S.W.; Schulert, G.S.; de Jesus, A.; Pickering, A.; Brunner, H.; Gadina, M.; Levine, S.; Goldbach-Mansky, R.; Boutelle, J.; Sinha, R.; et al. Next Gen Therapies for Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis and Macrophage Activation Syndrome symposium held on 3–4 October 2019. Pediatr. Rheumatol. Online J. 2020, 18 (Suppl. 1), 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Verweyen, E.L.; Schulert, G.S. Interfering with interferons: Targeting the JAK-STAT pathway in complications of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (SJIA). Rheumatology 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Bader-Meunier, B.; Hadchouel, A.; Berteloot, L.; Polivka, L.; Béziat, V.; Casanova, J.-L.; Lévy, R. Effectiveness and safety of ruxolitinib for the treatment of refractory systemic idiopathic juvenile arthritis like associated with interstitial lung disease: A case report. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2020, 81, e20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Table 1. Peculiar situations.
Table 1. Peculiar situations.
Clinical SituationsMain Questions
Recent-onset SJIA symptomsDifferential diagnosis:
Macrophage activation
Syndrome (MAS)
-
Infections
-
Post-infectious (Covid19, …)
-
Vasculitis (Kawasaki, PAN, …)
-
Inflammatory bowel disease
-
Autoimmune disease (lupus, hepatitis, …)
-
Monogenic autoinflammatory syndrome
-
Neoplasia (rare)
Therapeutic emergency 1:
-
Macrophage activation syndrome
-
Dyspnea on arythenoid arthritis (rare)
-
Myocarditis, marked pericarditis
-
Marked inflammation and pain
-
Early, diffuse polyarthritis
Differential diagnosis:
-
Infection (EBV, Leishmania …)
-
±monogenic immune disease (familial lymphohistiocytosis, Purtilo’s syndrome … or combined immunodeficiency) 1
-
Neoplasia (T-, NK-cell lymphoma, …)
SJIA subtype at risk of lung disease:
-
Early-onset SJIA, recurrent MAS
-
±chromosomal abnormality (trisomy 21 …)
-
“hypersensitivity” to biologics
Urgent, ±intensive treatment 1:
-
SJIA, systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis; PAN, periarteritis nodosa; Epstein–Barr virus. 1 case by case discussion with an expert center recommended.
Table 2. Therapeutic approaches 1.
Table 2. Therapeutic approaches 1.
Clinical SituationsClassical ApproachRecent Approaches
Recent-onset SJIA with auto-inflammatory syndrome±NSAIDs firstAnti-IL-1 treatment 2
High-dose steroidsor anti-IL-6 treatment
±lower-dose steroids
Long-lasting systemic inflammation with limited joint involvementAnti-IL-1 treatment
Anti-IL-6 treatment
JAK-inhibitor
±NSAID or low-dose steroidsIn refractory cases, discuss:
-
thalidomide
-
allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
Severe MAS flare in a SJIA patientHigh-dose steroids
±cyclosporin
High-dose steroids associated with:
-
high-dose anakinra (±IV)
±etoposide
-
or anti-IFNγ (emapalumab) ± anakinra or another SJIA treatment 3
-
or a JAK-inhibitor
Remitting-relapsing MASSteroids ± cyclosporineJAK-inhibitor 4, steroids.
In refractory cases, discuss:
-
anti-INFγ (emapalumab)
-
allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
Diffuse polyarthritisAnti-TFN treatment
Anti-IL-1 treatment
Anti-IL-6 treatment
Anti-IL-6 treatment (more evidence- based medicine than for other biologics or JAK-inhibitors)
±methotrexate ± low-dose steroids±methotrexate ±low-dose steroids
In refractory cases, discuss allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
SJIA, systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug; IL, interleukin; JAK, janus kinase; MAS, macrophage activation syndrome; IFN, interferon. 1 case by case discussion with an expert center recommended. 2 more evidence-based medicine for anti-IL-1 treatment and in particular anakinra in this situation. 3 anti-IFNγ treatment may help controlling MAS but not the underlying systemic disease that may need other therapy in association. 4 may be active both on MAS and on the underlying systemic disease.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Quartier, P. Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis/Pediatric Still’s Disease, a Syndrome but Several Clinical Forms: Recent Therapeutic Approaches. J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 1357. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11051357

AMA Style

Quartier P. Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis/Pediatric Still’s Disease, a Syndrome but Several Clinical Forms: Recent Therapeutic Approaches. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2022; 11(5):1357. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11051357

Chicago/Turabian Style

Quartier, Pierre. 2022. "Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis/Pediatric Still’s Disease, a Syndrome but Several Clinical Forms: Recent Therapeutic Approaches" Journal of Clinical Medicine 11, no. 5: 1357. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11051357

APA Style

Quartier, P. (2022). Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis/Pediatric Still’s Disease, a Syndrome but Several Clinical Forms: Recent Therapeutic Approaches. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 11(5), 1357. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11051357

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop