Evidence Hub

Safety and efficacy of blinatumomab in the treatment of refractory systemic sclerosis: a case series

Marc Scherlinger, Yannick Dieudonné, Stéphane Hilliquin, E. Chatelus, R. D'Alessandro, V. Gies, Benoît Nespola, T. Martin et al.

Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 2026

12 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to evaluate the safety, biological activity, and exploratory clinical effects of CD19-directed T-cell engagement with blinatumomab in patients with severe, treatment-refractory antitopoisomerase I-positive systemic sclerosis (SSc).

METHODS

We conducted an exploratory case series of 5 patients with refractory SSc who received a 14-day continuous intravenous infusion of blinatumomab (9 µg/d for 7 days, escalated to 28 µg/d for 7 days) in 2 tertiary hospitals. Safety assessments included cytokine release syndrome (CRS), neurotoxicity, infections, and serum immunoglobulin levels. Exploratory efficacy outcomes comprised modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS), pulmonary function tests, and patient-reported outcomes. Immunologic endpoints included serial peripheral CD19⁺ B-cell counts, B-cell subset phenotyping, and a 6-gene type I interferon signature. Patients' follow-up was a median of 8 months (range: 6-12).

RESULTS

Blinatumomab administration was generally well tolerated. Three patients experienced low-grade CRS (grade 1, n = 2; grade 2, n = 1), managed conservatively; no neurotoxicity or severe infections occurred. Rapid peripheral CD19⁺ B-cell depletion was achieved in all patients. B-cell repopulation occurred by 1 month in all but 1 patient and was dominated by naïve and transitional subsets. At 3 months, modest clinical improvements were observed, including a median mRSS change of -4 points (range: +1 to -8) from a baseline of 16 (range: 0-25) and a…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free