Basic Immunological Mechanism in Uveitis to Explain the Efficacy of Steroid

and Immunosuppressive Treatment

dr. Soedarman Sjamsoe, Sp. M (K)
Jakarta Eye Center

Abstract:

Uveitis is an inflammatory process that initially starts in the uvea, but can
also affect other adjacent eye structures, and is currently the fourth cause of
blindness in developed countries. Corticoids are probably the most widespread
treatment, but resorting to other immunosuppressive treatments is a freqeuent
pratice. Since the implication of different cytokines in uveitis has been well
demonstrated, the majority of recent treatments for this disesase include inhibitors
or antibodies against these. Nevertheless, adequate treatment for each uveitis type
entails a difficult therapeutic decision as no clear recommendations are found in
the literature, despite the few protocolized clinical assays and many case-control
studies done. This review aims to present, in order, the mechanisms and main
indications of corticosteroids and immunosuppressive drugs against noninfectious
uveitis.

Introduction

The term uveitis encompasses any inflammatory process that affects the
uveal tract (iris, ciliary body, and choroids) and its adjacent structures (vitreous
humour, retina, optic nerve, and vessels). The origin of this inflammatory process
can be of endogenous, by forming part of a systemic disease or mainly an eye
syndrome, or exogenous origin, related above all to infectious factors that affect
the eyeball in an isolated fashion orr take place in multisystemic infections. In
etiologi terms, we classify all uveitis types as infectious and non-infectious, and
we include secondary uveitis cases in systematic autoimmune disease or mainly
eye syndromes.
Basic Immunological Mechanism in Uveitis

Uveitis results from imbalance berween inflammatory mechanisms and

regulatory mechanisms. Acute inflammation initiated by those cells that are
previously present in affected tissues, mainly resident macrophages and dendritic
cells. In autoimmune uveitis, self-reactive T cells leave the thymus and when they
reach the eye they come in contact with retinal antigens. Myeloid dendritic cells
present a solid abilitiy of capturing antigens, which enables them to stimulate T
cells. Therefore, T-lymphocytes may differentiate into Tregs, Th1, Th17 or Th2
for precise immune response in function of the antigen encountered and cytokine
presence. Th1 and Th17 cells participate in inflammatory and autoimmune uveitis.
Th1 cells are crucial for the development of uveitis, whereas Th17 cells play a
relevant role in the late or chronic phase of uveitis, however induced Treg cells
defeat both Th1 and Th17 cell responses. Furthermore, the migration of Th1 and
Th17 to the eye, also results in the breaking down of the blood-retinal barrier and,
consequently, different leukocytes from the circulation are recruited. In the figure,
we can also see the main biologics that are being presently used in uveitis therapy
and its targets.

T helper cells, cytokines and uveitis treatment

Since the 1980’s, the T helper cell types 1 and 2 (Th1 and Th2) paradigm
has been considere the cornerstone of immune responses. Th1 cells, which secrete
IL-2, INF-y, and lymphotoxin, are critical for macrophage activation and nitric
oxide production. Th2 cells, which secrete IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13, mediate for
humoral immune responses. However, a third subset of T helper cells, called Th17
cells, was discovered and characterized 10 years ago. Thus inflammatory
components include Th1 and Th17 lymphocytes that produce pro-inflammatory
cytokines such as IL-2, INF-y, IL-17, IL-23 and TNF-α, which recruit leukocytes
from circulation to result in tissue damage. Experimental uveitis disease induction
has be characterized by the polarization of early T helper (Th) 0 or Th2-like
responses to Th1 and Th17, whereas resistance to disease is associated with both
regulatory cell and polarisation towards a Th2 pathway.

Treatment of noninfectious uveitis

Determining suitable treatment for each uveitis type involves hard

therapeutic decision-making as no clear recommendations are found in the
literature, despite the few randomized clinical assays performed and the many
case series or case-controls conducted. We must read their results more critically
as the information they provide may seem an irrefutable scientific dogma and
could, in fact, based on non-conclusive data obtained from very few patients, and
from the four basic clinical studies (case series, case-control, cohorts, and
randomized assyas), which are more ineffectual to obtain relevant clinical data.

1. Corticosteroids
Corticoids from the first-line therapi in uveitis cases. The
antiinflammatory properties of corticosteroids are mediated by cytosolic
glucocorticoid receptors which rise expression of anti-inflammatory
proteins. These receptors, members of the nuclear receptor family of
traanscription factors, have been found in the ciliary body, corneoscleral
tissue, and iris. It has commonly thought that the anti-inflammtory feature of
glucocorticoid receptor result from the transrepression of proinflammatory
genes by the binding of the monomeric glucocorticoid receptor to other
transcription factors. However some recent studies, which used mutant mice
in which the glucocorticoid receptor was mostly dimerization defective due
to the replacement of an alanin with a threonine, have shown that
glucocorticoid receptor dimers also account of resolving inflammation.
One of the problems with this form of administration is the wide
variability in the intraocular concentrations of corticoids in different patients
because of the limited diffusion of streoid particles through Tenon’s capsule
 and sclera. This situation has been overcome with an intravitreal injection of
corticoids, as Roesel et al. Demonstrated, and this form is superior to the
local form. In 2010 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a
biodegradable slow-release dexamethasone implant for venous thrombosis-
related cystoid macular edema. After demonstrating its efficacy and safety
in a randomized double-blind study, its use extended to macular edema
secondary to non-infectious intermediate or posterior uveitis.
The oral administration of corticoids is the initial treatment used in non-
infectious posterior uveitis and panuveitis cases. The initial prednisone dose
which treatment began with was 1 mg/kg/day, and it was continued until a
satisfactory anti-inflammtory response was obtained, normally after one
month. Next, the dose was gradually reduced, but for no longer than 3-6
months, due to serious systemic side effects like increased body weight,
hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolnemia, gastritis, gastrointestinal
ulcers, prematur epiphyses in children, retarded growth, osteopenia,
osteoporosis, etc. Higher corticoid doses (10 mg/day) have been reported to
not only inhibit calcium from diet being absorbed, but to also suppress the
response to calcitonin, which increases bone reabsorption. Loss of bone is
inevitable during therapies with steroids, and 4% - 5% can be lost in the first
six months. Effects in the spine and femur tend to be more marked, with a
2,5-fold higher risk of fractures compared with the general population. In
2010, the American College of Rheumatology published some
recommendations to prevent and treat corticoid-induced osteoporosis with
calcium (1200-1500 mg/day) and vitamin D (800 – 1000 UI/day) intake. If
certain undersirable side leaving corticoids or does not subsise, starting
therapy with immunosuppressors is indicated in order to premanently
withdraw corticoids.

2. T-lymphocyte inhibitors
 The most widely used immunosuppressors are T-lymphocyte inhibitors,
of which cyclosporine A is stressed because its efficacy compares with
corticoids. Specifically, the cyclosporine-cyclophilin complex inhibits
calcineurin phosphatase induced upon T-cell activation by suppressing IL-
2 syntheses. The suitable dose, with proven efficacy and fewer adverse
effects, in considered tp be 2 – 5 mg/kg/day; at this dose, only 10.7% of
patients abandoned treatment bacause of undersirable effects. The
multicentre SITE (the Systemic Immunosuppressive Therapy for Eye
Diseases Cohort Study) conducte in the USA stated that the befenits of
using cyclosporine were modest since it observed that it offered a
complete and sustained solution for inflammation in only 33.4% and
51,9% of patients at si months. This study also found that minimum
inflammation remained in 25% of patients over the same treatment period.
This study also advised not using this drug in people aged over 55, in
whom the complications rate rose. Tacrolismus is a macrolide antibiotic
produced by Streptomyces tsukubaensis. Tacrilismus inhibits the activation
of T lymphocytes by a mechanism similar to that of cyclosporine.

3. Antimetabolites
MTX (methotrexate) is an antimetabolite of folic acid that plays by
competitively binding to enzyme dehydrofolate reductase, thereby
blocking the formation of purines and pyrimedines within the cell, and
consequently inhibiting DNA synthesis. MTX may also delay protein
synthesis by impending the conversion os some amino acids. Hence it
inhibitis cell growth and proliferation by depleting the pool of reduced
folates or tetrahydrofolates, and may also induced T-cell apoptosis,
modification of the B-cell response and cytokine production inhibition.
The SITE study informed that MTX caused eye inflammation to
completely subside in 66% of the 384 patients studied in one year. Theses
data suggest that MTX is more beneficial that cyclosporine, which
 obtained a result of 51.9% during the same period. Even so, MTX was
described to have no beneficial effects in 13% of the cases. The rate of
complications associated with this drug (myelosuppression,
hepatotoxicity) led 16% of patients to drop treatment.
Another immunosuppressor drug evaluated by the SITE group was
mycophenolate mofetil. Mycophenolate mofetil is a selective inhibitor of
inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase that interferes with guanosine
nucleotide synthesis. Its major effects are on T and B lymphocytes. It
prevents lymphocyte proliferation, suppresses antibody synthesis,
interferes with cellular adhesion to vascular endothelium, and decreases
recruitment of leukocytes to sites of inflammation. After evaluating 236
patients treated in several hospital clinic in the USA, it was observed that
the remission rate at six months was 53%, and 73% after one year, this
drug was well-tolerated and ony 12% dropped treatment because of side
effects.
Azathioprine is a purine nucleoside analog. It interferes with adenine
and guanine ribonucleotides by suppressioon of inosinic aicd synthesis,
which in turn interferes with DNA replication and RNA transcription.
Immunologically, azathioprine decreases the numbers of peripheral T and
B lymphocytes, and reduces mixed lymphocyte reactivity, interleukin-2
synthesis and IgM production.
Clinical Experience for inflammatory Eye Disease. Uncontrolled case
series of azathioprine suggested that it was effective for the treatment of
chronic uveitis, usually in combination with corticosteroids. The most
common side effect is gastrointestinal intolerance, primarily manifested as
gastrointestinal upset, nausea, and less commonly vomiting, which may be
seen in up to 25% of patients and may result in discontinuation of therapy.
Other serious side effects include hepatoxocity, which occurs in less that
2%.
4. Biologics therapy
The use of biologics to treat uveitis has quickly extended in the past
decade. Their achievement has underlined the key roles of inflammatory
cytokines in the pathogenesis of inflammatory uveitis, pricipally TNF-α,
IL-1, and IL-6. They have also refocused attention on T-cells and B-cells.
These products are certainly useful when conventional immunosuppressor
therapy fails or is not well tolerated, or also for treating concommitant
ophthalmic and systemic inflammation which could benefit from these
medicines. Nowadays, however, their use as a first-line therapy is not
recommended in most patients, except in specific cases in which eyesight
may be threatened, or in the other highly specific cases mentioned herein
demonstrated as being efficient in uveitis secondary to Behcet, sarcoidosis,
Birdhshot, Vogt-Koyonagi-Harada, and after being used as an adjuvant
with other immunosuppressors, where a 50% reduction in the
immunosuppressor dose was observed in 85% of patients at six months.
- Infliximab :
Infliximab is a chimeric IgG1k monoclonal antibody
composed of human-constant and murine-variable regions, and is
specific for human TNF-α. It inhibits the biological activity of TNF-
α by both binding with high affinity to the soluble and
transmembrane forms of TNF-α and blocking receptor binding. In a
prospective study, Sfikakis et al observed how vitritis, macular
edema, amd vasculitis were resolved in 28 days in 90% of the 25
patients enrolled with uveitis for Behcet. This therapy has also been
described with good results in cases of sarcoidosis, Vogt-Koyanagi-
Harada, Birdshot, etc.

- Adalimumab :
Adalimumab is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits factor
TNF-α and, unlike infliximab, it is totally human, and offers the
added advantage of being used subcutaneously, and can be self-
administered by patients every two recent years, its use has
extended to childhood refrectory uveitis. Shortly after 2002,
Adalimumab seemed an effective safe therapy for refractory uveitis
management. It might provide the possibility of reducing the use of
concomitant immunosuppressive drugs in these patients. In fact,
Adalimumab offers numerous advantages over inflixab; e.g., easier
 administration, better patient compliance, cost- effectiveness, and
fewer adverse cases. Retrospective studies have shown its
effectiveness in uveitis secondary to JIA as inflammation subsided
in 80% of the cases after six weeks of treatment. Adalimumab
seems to be the most effective biological agent in JIA as it is
capable of controliing inflammation in 35% of refractory uveitis in
children who had not previously responeded to inflixamab or
Etanercept. Infliximab and adalimumab can be considered as first-
line immunomodulatory agents for the treatment of ocular
manifestations of Behcet’s disease. Infliximab and adalimuman can
be considered as potential second-line immunomodulatory agents
for the treatment of severe ocular inflammtory conditions including
posterior uveitis, panuveitis, severe uveitis associated with
seronegative spondyloarthropathy, and scleritis in patients requiring
immuno-modulation in patients who hava failed or whi are not
candidates for antimetabolite or calcineurion inhibitor
immunomodulation.

Conclusion :
While steriods remain the primary initial treatmen for patients with
noninfectious uveitis, the serious adverse effects associated with their chronic use
make them an unacceptable treatment strategy in chronic cases. Hence the current
toward treatment of noninfectious uveitis incorporates the use of
immunosuppressive agents. Immunosuppressives have the ability of inducing
durable remission, eventually enabling many patients to remain in remission and
off all medicaitons. Selecting an immunosuppressive agent for a particular case is
a difficult task, It will depend on the cause and clinical behavior of each case, the
presence or absence of an underlying systemic disease, the patient’s general
health, and the patient’s response to such immunosuppressive therapy. The advent
of biologic agents may provide added benefit with reasonable safety profiles in
selected cases of uveitis resistant to conventional immunosuppressive therapy.