Total Hip Replacement or Resistance Training for Severe Hip Osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Total hip replacement is routinely recommended for severe hip osteoarthritis, but data from randomized trials are lacking regarding comparison of the effectiveness of this procedure with that of nonsurgical treatment such as resistance training. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial to compare total hip replacement with resistance training in patients 50 years of age or older who had severe hip osteoarthritis and an indication for surgery. The primary outcome was the change in patient-reported hip pain and function from baseline to 6 months after the initiation of treatment, assessed with the use of the Oxford Hip Score (range, 0 to 48, with higher scores indicating less pain and better function). Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients (mean age, 67.6 years) were randomly assigned to total hip replacement (53 patients) or resistance training (56 patients). In an intention-to-treat analysis, the mean increase (indicating improvement) in the Oxford Hip Score was 15.9 points in patients assigned to total hip replacement and 4.5 points in patients assigned to resistance training (difference, 11.4 points; 95% confidence interval, 8.9 to 14.0; P<0.001). At 6 months, 5 patients (9%) who had been assigned to total hip replacement had not undergone surgery, and 12 patients (21%) who had been assigned to resistance training had undergone total hip replacement. The incidence of serious adverse events at 6 months was similar in the two groups; the majority of such events were known complications of total hip replacement. CONCLUSIONS: In patients 50 years of age or older who had severe hip osteoarthritis and an indication for surgery, total hip replacement resulted in a clinically important, superior reduction in hip pain and improved hip function, as reported by patients, at 6 months as compared with resistance training. (Funded by the Danish Rheumatism Association and others; PROHIP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04070027.).

Exploring the effect on primary endpoints in trials testing targeted therapy interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-epidemiological study on the appropriate use of a core outcome set.

OBJECTIVES: To explore which core domain is best associated with the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20% response in trials assessing the effect of targeted interventions in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A meta-epidemiological study was performed on randomised trials investigating biologics and targeted agents compared with placebo or conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in patients with RA. The main outcome measures were ORs for the ACR 20% response and at least one of the eight core domains according to the existing RA core outcome set (COS) analysed based on standardised mean differences. RESULTS: 115 trials involving 55 422 patients with RA were eligible. The OR for achieving ACR 20% response was 3.19 (95% CI 2.96 to 3.44) for the experimental interventions relative to the comparators. The median number of COS domains reported was 6; 18 trials reported only 1 domain, 17 all 8. Univariable meta-regression analyses indicated that each of the eight core domains was significantly associated with ACR 20% response, yet improvements in physical disability explain a successful ACR 20% response the most. Including only trials reporting on all eight core domains, univariable meta-regression analyses proved improvement in fatigue to explain a successful ACR 20% response the most. CONCLUSIONS: Within this dataset, it is evident that the conclusions concerning our primary objective were significantly influenced by both the amount and characteristics of missing data. Our data suggest that fatigue could be more important for the primary endpoint than previously assumed, but this is based on limited data.

Comparison of weight loss interventions in overweight and obese adults with knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the comparative effectiveness of weight-loss strategies for osteoarthritis (OA) to develop rational treatment algorithms aimed at improving OA-related symptoms in overweight/obese individuals. DESIGN: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception to June 2023 for observational studies and randomized trials. Network meta-analyses were performed using a frequentist approach. Effect sizes for pain and function were computed as standardized mean differences, while change in body weight was computed as mean differences. RESULTS: 13 RCTs on knee OA (KOA) (2800 participants) with 7 interventions: diet (D); exercise (E); diet and exercise (DE); pharmacological (L); psychological (P); psychological, diet, and exercise (PDE); and Mediterranean diets (M) were networked. For weight change (kg), all interventions significantly outperformed control comparators, with effect sizes ranging from -11.2 (95% CI, -16.0, -6.5 kg) for the most effective approach (PDE) to -4.7 (95% CI, -6.7, -2.7 kg) for the least effective approach (DE). In terms of pain (0-20 scale), only DE outperformed control comparators (-2.2, 95% CI: -4.1, -0.21), whereas PDE was not superior to control comparators (-3.9, 95% CI: -8.4, 0.5) in improving the pain. Regardless of the chosen intervention, prediction intervals from meta-regression analysis indicate that significant pain relief may be anticipated when patients achieve at least a weight reduction of 7%. CONCLUSIONS: PDE and DE interventions may offer the most effective approach for weight loss, potentially leading to improvements in pain and physical function among overweight/obese individuals with KOA if they achieve more than 7% weight loss.

Comparative effectiveness of different placebos and comparator groups for hand osteoarthritis exploring the impact of contextual factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the pain relief effects of comparators (placebos and untreated control groups) in hand osteoarthritis trials and the impact of contextual factors. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL from inception to December 26, 2021. We included randomised controlled trials of people with hand osteoarthritis with a placebo or an untreated control group. We assessed the Risk of Bias with Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool version 2. Each comparator was contrasted with a null-arm, imputed as having a zero change from baseline with the same standard deviation as the comparator. We combined the standardised mean differences with a random effects meta-analysis. The contextual factors' effect was explored in meta-regression and stratified models with pain as the dependent variable. RESULTS: 84 trials (7262 participants) were eligible for quantitative synthesis, of which 76 (6462 participants) were eligible for the stratified analyses. Placebos were superior to their matched null-arms in relieving pain with an effect size of -0.51 (95% confidence interval -0.61 to -0.42), while untreated control groups were not. When analysing all comparators, blinded trial designs and low risk of bias were associated with higher pain relief compared to an open-label trial design and some concern or high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: The placebo response on pain for people with hand osteoarthritis was increased by appropriate blinding and a lower risk of bias assessment. Placebos were superior to a null-arm, while untreated control groups were not. Results emphasise the importance of using appropriate comparators in clinical trials. PROSPERO REGISTRATION ID: CRD42022298984.

The impact of an illness perception conversation on open-label placebo response in knee osteoarthritis: A randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of an illness perception conversation (IPC), relative to a research participation conversation (RPC), on 2-week changes in knee pain in patients with knee osteoarthritis. METHOD: This was a randomised single-blind trial. Patients were randomised to two matched conversations. An IP conversation concerning the participant's knee pain-related illness perception (IP) or an RPC concerning the participant's motivation for participating in research. Both conversations were followed by an open-label intraarticular saline injection in the most symptomatic knee. The primary outcome was change in knee pain from baseline to 2 weeks follow-up on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS). Key secondary outcomes included the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales: Activities of daily living (ADL) and Quality of life (QoL). Main analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population using repeated measures mixed effects linear models. RESULTS: 103 patients were randomised to the IPC group (n = 52) and the RPC group (n = 51). VAS knee pain scores changed statistically significantly from baseline to end of treatment in both groups, -13.7 (standard error [SE]: 3.2) in the IPC group and -13.0 (SE: 3.1) in the RPC group with an adjusted between-group difference of -0.7 (95% CI: -8.3 to 6.9; P = 0.85). Likewise, no group differences were seen in KOOS ADL and KOOS QoL. CONCLUSION: A conversation concerning knee pain-related IP did not augment the pain-relieving effect of an open-label placebo injection when compared to a similar control conversation concerning motivations for participating in research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05225480.

"I couldn't carry on taking a drug like that": A qualitative study of patient perspectives on side effects from rheumatology drugs.

OBJECTIVES: There is growing interest in collecting outcome information directly from patients in clinical trials. This study evaluates what patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) consider important to know about symptomatic side effects they may experience from a new prescription drug. METHODS: Patients with inflammatory arthritis, who had one or more prescribed drugs for their disease for at least 12 months, participated in focus groups and individual interviews. Discussions were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: We conducted seven focus groups with 34 participants across three continents. We found four overarching and two underpinning themes. The 'impact on life' was connected to participants 'daily life', 'family life', 'work life', and 'social life'. In 'psychological and physical aspects' participants described 'limitation to physical function', 'emotional dysregulation' and 'an overall mental state'. Extra tests, hospital visits and payment for medication were considered a 'time, energy and financial burden' of side effects. Participants explained important measurement issues to be 'severity', 'frequency', and 'duration'. Underpinning these issues, participants evaluated the 'benefit-harm-balance' which includes 'the cumulative burden' of having several side effects and the persistence of side effects over time. CONCLUSIONS: In treatment for RMDs, there seems to be an urgent need for feasible measures of patient-reported bother (impact on life and cumulative burden) from side effects and the benefit-harm-balance. These findings contribute new evidence in support of a target domain-an outcome that represents the patient voice evaluating the symptomatic treatment-related side effects for people with RMDs enrolled in clinical trials.

Effects of smoking on clinical treatment outcomes amongst patients with chronic inflammatory diseases initiating biologics: secondary analyses of the prospective BELIEVE cohort study.

The prevalence and disease burden of chronic inflammatory diseases (CIDs) are predicted to rise. Patients are commonly treated with biological agents, but the individual treatment responses vary, warranting further research into optimizing treatment strategies. This study aimed to compare the clinical treatment responses in patients with CIDs initiating biologic therapy based on smoking status, a notorious risk factor in CIDs. In this multicentre cohort study including 233 patients with a diagnosis of Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, psoriatic arthritis or psoriasis initiating biologic therapy, we compared treatment response rates after 14 to 16 weeks and secondary outcomes between smokers and non-smokers. We evaluated the contrast between groups using logistic regression models: (i) a "crude" model, only adjusted for the CID type, and (ii) an adjusted model (including sex and age). Among the 205 patients eligible for this study, 53 (26%) were smokers. The treatment response rate among smokers (n = 23 [43%]) was lower compared to the non-smoking CID population (n = 92 [61%]), corresponding to a "crude" OR of 0.51 (95% CI: [0.26;1.01]) while adjusting for sex and age resulted in consistent findings: 0.51 [0.26;1.02]. The contrast was apparently most prominent among the 38 RA patients, with significantly lower treatment response rates for smokers in both the "crude" and adjusted models (adjusted OR 0.13, [0.02;0.81]). Despite a significant risk of residual confounding, patients with CIDs (rheumatoid arthritis in particular) should be informed that smoking probably lowers the odds of responding sufficiently to biological therapy. Registration: Clinical.Trials.gov NCT03173144.

Impact of gluten intake on clinical outcomes in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases initiating biologics: Secondary analysis of the prospective multicentre BELIEVE cohort study.

Chronic inflammatory diseases (CIDs) pose a growing healthcare challenge, with a substantial proportion of patients showing inadequate response to biological treatment. There is renewed interest in dietary changes to optimize treatment regimens, with a growing body of evidence suggesting beneficial effects with adherence to a gluten-free diet. This study compared the likelihood of achieving clinical response to biological treatment after 14-16 weeks in patients with CID with high versus low-to-medium gluten intake. Secondary outcomes of interest included changes in disease activity, health-related quality of life and C-reactive protein. The study was a multicentre prospective cohort of 193 participants with a CID diagnosis (i.e. Crohn's Disease, Ulcerative Colitis, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Axial Spondyloarthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis or Psoriasis) who initiated biological treatment between 2017 and 2020. Participants were stratified based on their habitual gluten intake: the upper 33.3% (high gluten intake) and the remaining 66.6% (low-to-medium gluten intake). The proportion of patients achieving clinical response to biological treatment after 14-16 weeks was compared using logistic regression models. The median gluten intake differed significantly between groups (12.5 g/day vs. 5.9 g/day, standardized mean difference = 1.399). In total, 108 (56%) achieved clinical response to treatment, with no difference between 35 (55%) in the high gluten group and 73 (57%) in the medium-to-low gluten group (OR = 0.96 [0.51-1.79], p = 0.897). No differences were found with secondary outcomes. In conclusion, this study found no association between gluten intake and response to biological treatment in patients with CID.

Minor tranquillizers for short-term treatment of newly onset symptoms of anxiety and distress: a systematic review with network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Unspecific symptoms of anxiety and distress are frequently encountered in patients in both general practice and acute psychiatric services. Minor tranquillizers may be a treatment option when non-pharmacological interventions are insufficient or unavailable. We conducted a systematic review with network meta-analysis of the evidence for short-term (1-4 weeks) pharmacological treatment of newly onset symptoms of anxiety and distress. We searched the PsycInfo, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases and extracted data following a predefined hierarchy of outcomes. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework (GRADE). We included 34 randomized trials comprising a total of 7044 patients with adjustment disorders or anxiety spectrum disorders. The network meta-analysis showed that regarding the critical outcome symptoms of anxiety within 1-4 weeks benzodiazepines (SMD - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.77 to - 0.40), quetiapine (SMD - 0.51, 95% CI - 0.90 to - 0.13) and pregabalin (SMD - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.87 to - 0.28) all performed better than placebo with no statistically significant difference between the drugs. Data on other important outcomes were inconsistently reported. Adverse effects varied, but overall, it was uncertain whether adverse effects differed between interventions. The evidence regarding the risk of dependence was uncertain, but dependence may be a concern in susceptible individuals even with short-term treatment. Overall, the certainty of the evidence according to GRADE was rated as low to very low across outcomes. Despite the limitations in the evidence, the results of this review can inform treatment guidelines, supporting clinicians in the choice of minor tranquillizer in this prevalent and help-seeking, clinically heterogeneous population.

Hidradenitis suppurativa prevalence in Algeria: A multicenter cross-sectional study.

Introduction Although there has been an expansion of knowledge on hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), data about the disease is largely based on Western population and no relevant African or Asian studies are available. Methods We conducted a descriptive, cross-sectional, multicenter study, as part of GHiSA (Global HS Atlas) initiative, to assess the epidemiologic profile of HS in Algerian population. Healthy adults accompanying patients undergoing care in a non-dermatological wards were approached and invited to complete a self-administered questionnaire. Subsequently, a clinical assessment was performed by an in-person dermatologists for all screen-positive participants and ten percent of the screen-negative ones. Results A total of 1434 participants were included in this study. The prevalence of HS among Algerian adults was 0.78%. Compared to non HS group, no significant difference was found regarding gender, age, body mass index and smoker status. Both the sensitivity (100%) and the specificity (97%) of the HS screening questionnaire were excellent. Conclusion The prevalence of HS in Algeria is very close to that of Australia (0.8%) and Europe (0.7%) and almost the same prevalence found by Ghanaian study (other GHiSA study from Africa). The results of this study demonstrate also the reliability and validity of GHiSA questionnaire as HS data collection instrument.

The Global Hidradenitis Suppurativa Atlas Methodology: Combining Global Proportions in a Pooled Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Data concerning the global burden of hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) are limited. Reported prevalence estimates vary between 0.0003% and 4.1%, and data from various geographical regions are still to be collected. Previously reported prevalences have been limited by the methodological approach and source of data. This has resulted in great heterogeneity as prevalence data from physician-diagnosed cases poorly match those of self-reported apparent HS disease. METHODS: The Global Hidradenitis Suppurativa Atlas (GHiSA) introduces an innovative approach to determine the global prevalence of HS. This approach involves using a previously validated questionnaire to screen apparently healthy adults accompanying a patient to a non-dermatological outpatient clinic visit in a hospital or a private/family medicine clinic. The screening questionnaire (i.e., the index test) is combined with a subsequent physician-based in-person validation (i.e., the reference standard) of the participants who screen positive. Approximately ten percent of the screen-negative participants are also clinically assessed to verify the diagnostic precision of the test. The local prevalence (pi) will be estimated from each country that submits the number of patients who are HS positive according to the index test and clinical examination (n), and the corresponding total number of observations (N). CONCLUSION: The GHiSA Global Prevalence studies are currently running simultaneously in 58 countries across six continents (Africa, Europe, Australia, North America, South America, and Asia). The goal of the combined global proportion is the generation of a single summary (i.e., proportional meta-analysis), which will be done after a logit transformation and synthesized using a random-effects model. The novel standardization of the Global Prevalence Studies conducted through GHiSA enables direct international comparisons, which were previously not possible due to substantial heterogeneity in past HS prevalence studies.

Exploring TNFi drug-levels and anti-drug antibodies during tapering among patients with inflammatory arthritis: secondary analyses from the randomised BIODOPT trial.

To evaluate tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) drug-levels and presence of anti-drug antibodies (ADAb) in patients with inflammatory arthritis who taper TNFi compared to TNFi continuation. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, or axial spondyloarthritis on stable TNFi dose and in low disease activity ≥ 12 months were randomised (2:1) to disease activity-guided tapering or control. Blood samples at baseline, 12- and 18-months were evaluated for TNFi drug-levels and ADAb. In total, 129 patients were randomised to tapering (n = 88) or control (n = 41). Between baseline and month 18, a significant shift in TNFi drug-levels were observed in the tapering group resulting in fewer patients with high drug-levels (change: - 14% [95% CI - 27 to - 1%]) and more with low drug-levels (change: 18% [95% CI 5-31%]). Disease activity was equivalent between groups at 18 months, mean difference: RA - 0.06 (95% CI - 0.44 to 0.33), PsA 0.03 (95% CI - 0.36 to 0.42), and axSpA 0.16 (- 0.17 to 0.49), equivalence margins ± 0.5 disease activity points. ADAb were detected in eight patients, all from the tapering group. TNFi drug-level category or ADAb were not predictive for achieving successful tapering at 18 months. TNFi drug-levels decreased during tapering which indicate adherence to the tapering algorithm. Despite the difference in TNFi drug-levels at 18 months, disease activity remained equivalent, and only few tapering patients had detectable ADAb. These data do not support using TNFi drug-level and/or ADAb to guide the tapering decision but future research with larger trials is needed.Trial registration: EudraCT: 2017-001970-41, December 21, 2017.

Microfibrillar-associated protein 4 as a predictive biomarker of treatment response in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases initiating biologics: secondary analyses based on the prospective BELIEVE cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there are no reliable biomarkers for predicting treatment response in chronic inflammatory diseases (CIDs). OBJECTIVE: To determine whether serum microfibrillar-associated protein 4 (MFAP4) levels can predict the treatment response to biological therapy in patients with CIDs. METHODS: The BELIEVE study was originally designed as a prospective, multi-center cohort study of 233 patients with either rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, psoriasis, axial spondyloarthritis, Crohn's disease, or ulcerative colitis, initiating treatment with a biologic agent (or switching to another). Clinical assessment and blood sample collection were performed at baseline and 14-16 weeks after treatment initiation. The primary analyses included participants with available blood samples at baseline; missing data were handled as non-responders. The patients were stratified into the upper tertile of serum MFAP4 (High MFAP4) versus a combined category of middle and lower tertiles (Other MFAP4). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with clinical response to biologic therapy after 14-16 weeks. RESULTS: 211 patients were included in the primary analysis population. The mean age was 43.7 (SD: 14.8) years, and 120 (59%) were female. Positive treatment response was observed in 41 (59%) and 69 (49%) for High MFAP4 and Other MFAP4, respectively. When adjusting for pre-specified variables (CID, age, sex, smoking status, and BMI), the adjusted OR was 2.28 (95% CI: 1.07 to 4.85) for a positive treatment outcome in the High MFAP4 group. CONCLUSION: A high MFAP4 status before initiating biological treatment is associated with a positive clinical response, when adjusting for confounding factors.

The Effect of Low-Dose Glucocorticoids Over Two Years on Weight and Blood Pressure in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Individual Patient Data From Five Randomized Trials.

BACKGROUND: Weight gain and hypertension are well known adverse effects of treatment with high-dose glucocorticoids. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of 2 years of low-dose glucocorticoid treatment in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). DESIGN: Pooled analysis of 5 randomized controlled trials with 2-year interventions allowing concomitant treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. SETTING: 12 countries in Europe. PATIENTS: Early and established RA. INTERVENTION: Glucocorticoids at 7.5 mg or less prednisone equivalent per day. MEASUREMENTS: Coprimary end points were differences in change from baseline in body weight and mean arterial pressure after 2 years in intention-to-treat analyses. Difference in the change of number of antihypertensive drugs after 2 years was a secondary end point. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were done to assess the robustness of primary findings. RESULTS: A total of 1112 participants were included (mean age, 61.4 years [SD, 14.5]; 68% women). Both groups gained weight in 2 years, but glucocorticoids led, on average, to 1.1 kg (95% CI, 0.4 to 1.8 kg; P < 0.001) more weight gain than the control treatment. Mean arterial pressure increased by about 2 mm Hg in both groups, with a between-group difference of -0.4 mm Hg (CI, -3.0 to 2.2 mm Hg; P = 0.187). These results were consistent in sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Most patients did not change the number of antihypertensive drugs, and there was no evidence of differences between groups. LIMITATION: Body composition was not assessed, and generalizability to non-European regions may be limited. CONCLUSION: This study provides robust evidence that low-dose glucocorticoids, received over 2 years for the treatment of RA, increase weight by about 1 kg but do not increase blood pressure. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Incidence and survival of multiply revised knee arthroplasties in Denmark 1998-2021: a nationwide register-based study.

PURPOSE: The primary aim of our study was to identify the absolute incidence and implant survival of multiply revised knee arthroplasties based on nationwide register data. The secondary aim was to determine the change in the absolute incidence and implant survival of multiply revised knee arthroplasties Methods: We performed a retrospective observational study of primary knee arthroplasties using several nationwide Danish registers. All primary knee arthroplasties performed in Denmark from 1998 to 2021 were identified. From these primary arthroplasties, revision procedures were identified. Kaplan-Meier plots were used in survival analysis to estimate the likelihood of implant survival. RESULTS: 161,384 primary knee arthroplasties and their revisions performed between 1998 and 2021 were identified; of 13,786 (8.5%) revisions there were 10,638 1st revisions, 2,148 2nd revisions, 624 3rd revisions, 223 4th revisions, and 153 procedures that had been revised more than 4 times. The 10-year revision-free survival of primary arthroplasties was 92.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 92.2-92.5). First-time revisions had a 10-year revision-free survival of 75.9% (CI 74.9-76.9). The 10-year survival of second- and third-time revisions was 65.1% (CI 62.6-67.6) and 57.8% (CI 53.4-62.5), respectively. The 10-year implant survival probabilities of primary knee arthroplasties were 91.4% in 1998-2009 and 93.3% in 2010-2021 (difference 2.2%). The 10-year implant survival probabilities of 1st revisions were 77% in 1998-2009 and 75% in 2010-2021 (difference -2.4%). CONCLUSION: We found that 0.3% of all primary knee arthroplasties resulted in 3 or more revisions. The implant survival decreased for each consecutive revision, with almost half of the 3rd revisions being re-revised within 10 years. The 10-survival of the primary implant was higher in 2010-2021, and the 10-year survival of the 1st revision was higher in 1998-2009.

The left atrial appendage closure by surgery-2 (LAACS-2) trial protocol rationale and design of a randomized multicenter trial investigating if left atrial appendage closure prevents stroke in patients undergoing open-heart surgery irrespective of preoperative atrial fibrillation status and stroke risk.

BACKGROUND: Current recommendations regarding the use of surgical left atrial appendage (LAA) closure to prevent thromboembolisms lack high-level evidence. Patients undergoing open-heart surgery often have several cardiovascular risk factors and a high occurrence of postoperative atrial fibrillation (AF)-with a high recurrence rate-and are thus at a high risk of stroke. Therefore, we hypothesized that concomitant LAA closure during open-heart surgery will reduce mid-term risk of stroke independently of preoperative AF status and CHA2DS2-VASc score. METHODS: This protocol describes a randomized multicenter trial. Consecutive participants ≥18 years scheduled for first-time planned open-heart surgery from cardiac surgery centers in Denmark, Spain, and Sweden are included. Both patients with a previous diagnosis of paroxysmal or chronic AF, as well as those without AF, are eligible to participate, irrespective of their CHA2DS2-VASc score. Patients already planned for ablation or LAA closure during surgery, with current endocarditis, or where follow-up is not possible are considered noneligible. Patients are stratified by site, surgery type, and preoperative or planned oral anticoagulation treatment. Subsequently, patients are randomized 1:1 to either concomitant LAA closure or standard care (ie, open LAA). The primary outcome is stroke, including transient ischemic attack, as assigned by 2 independent neurologists blinded to the treatment allocation. To recognize a 60% relative risk reduction of the primary outcome with LAA closure, 1,500 patients are randomized and followed for 2 years (significance level of 0.05 and power of 90%). CONCLUSIONS: The LAACS-2 trial is likely to impact the LAA closure approach in most patients undergoing open-heart surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03724318.

Tolerability and comparative effectiveness of TNF-, IL-17-, and IL-23(p19) inhibitors in psoriatic arthritis: A target trial emulation study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare tolerability and effectiveness of two different classes of biological Disease-Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Drugs (bDMARDs; interleukin (IL)-17- and IL-23(p19) inhibitors) relative to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) regarding the drug survival rates and treatment outcomes in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: We emulated a target trial on comparative effectiveness using observational data from a prospective cohort study based on the Parker Institute's PsA cohort - the PIPA cohort. All patients underwent interview and clinical examination programme at baseline and at follow-up visits at four and twelve months. The primary endpoint, drug survival, was assessed up to 12 months from baseline. We estimated hazard ratios from proportional hazards model and used propensity score adjustment in an attempt to deconfound and emulate a random treatment assignment. RESULTS: We included a total of 109 patients in the intention-to-monitor population at baseline initiating either TNFi (75 patients), IL17i (26 patients), or IL23(19)i (8 patients). Hazard ratios in the propensity adjusted model comparing IL-17i and IL-23(p19)i to TNFi were 1.36 (95% CI 0.59-3.14) and 0.56 (95% CI 0.10-3.24), respectively. TNFi and IL-17i had comparable effects regarding response rates and changes in clinical outcomes after 12 months, whereas IL-23(p19)i tended to perform better overall. CONCLUSION: No decisive differences between drugs were observed at group level regarding drug survival and clinical outcomes after 12 months. TNFi, IL-17i, and IL-23(p19)i may all be considered equally effective in the treatment of patients with PsA, advocating for investigating more in personalised treatment strategies.

The effect of group-based cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to compare the effect of cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) to usual care on sleep efficiency, measured by polysomnography (PSG) immediately after the intervention at week 7. Secondary objectives included comparing the longer-term effect on sleep- and RA-related outcomes at week 26. METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial using a parallel group design, the experimental intervention was 6 weeks' nurse-led group-based CBT-I; the comparator was usual care. Analyses were based on the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle; missing data were statistically modelled using repeated-measures linear mixed effects models adjusted for the level at baseline. RESULTS: The ITT population consisted of 62 patients (89% women), with an average age of 58 years and an average sleep efficiency of 83.1%. At primary end point, sleep efficiency was 88.7% in the CBT-I group, compared with 83.7% in the control group (difference: 5.03 [95% CI -0.37, 10.43]; P = 0.068) measured by PSG at week 7. Key secondary outcomes measured with PSG had not improved at week 26. However, for all the patient-reported key secondary sleep- and RA-related outcomes, there were statistically highly significant differences between CBT-I and usual care (P < 0.0001), e.g. insomnia (Insomnia Severity Index: -9.85 [95% CI -11.77, -7.92]) and the RA impact of disease (RAID: -1.36 [95% CI -1.92, -0.80]) at week 26. CONCLUSION: Nurse-led group-based CBT-I did not lead to an effect on sleep efficiency objectively measured with PSG. However, CBT-I showed improvement on all patient-reported key secondary sleep- and RA-related outcomes measured at week 26. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03766100.

Safety and efficacy associated with long-term low-dose glucocorticoids in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of long-term low-dose glucocorticoids (GCs) in RA. METHODS: A protocolised systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO No. CRD42021252528) of double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trials (RCTs) comparing a low dose of GCs (≤ 7.5mg/day prednisone) to placebo over at least 2 years was performed. The primary outcome investigated was adverse events (AEs). We performed random-effects meta-analyses and used the Cochrane RoB tool and GRADE to assess risk of bias and quality of evidence (QoE). RESULTS: Six trials with 1078 participants were included. There was no evidence of an increased risk of AEs (incidence rate ratio 1.08; 95% CI 0.86, 1.34; P = 0.52); however, the QoE was low. The risks of death, serious AEs, withdrawals due to AEs, and AEs of special interest did not differ from placebo (very low to moderate QoE). Infections occurred more frequently with GCs (risk ratio 1.4; 1.19-1.65; moderate QoE). Concerning benefit, we found moderate to high quality evidence of improvement in disease activity (DAS28: -0.23; -0.43 to -0.03), function (HAQ -0.09; -0.18 to 0.00), and Larsen scores (-4.61; -7.52 to -1.69). In other efficacy outcomes, including Sharp van der Heijde scores, there was no evidence of benefits with GCs. CONCLUSION: There is very low to moderate QoE for no harm with long-term low dose GCs in RA, except for an increased risk of infections in GC users. The benefit-risk ratio might be reasonable forusing low-dose long-term GCs considering the moderate to high quality evidence for disease-modifying properties.

Predicting successful biologics tapering in patients with inflammatory arthritis: Secondary analyses based on the BIOlogical Dose OPTimisation (BIODOPT) trial.

AIMS: To evaluate predictors for successful biologic tapering among patients with inflammatory arthritis using baseline characteristics from the BIODOPT trial. METHODS: Adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis or axial spondyloarthritis on stable biologic dose and in low disease activity ≥12 months were enrolled. Participants were randomized (2:1) to disease activity-guided biologic tapering or continuation of baseline biologic. Patients achieving successful tapering reduced their biologic dose by ≥50%, had no protocol deviations and were in low disease activity at 18 months. Modified Poisson regression with robust variance estimator was applied. RESULTS: In total, 142 patients were randomized to tapering (n = 95) or control (n = 47). Successful tapering was achieved by 32 and 2%, respectively. Tapering group was the only statistically significant independent predictor for successful tapering, risk ratio (RR): 14.0 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.9 to 101.3, P = .009). However, higher Short Form Health Survey 36 mental component summary (SF-36 MCS) was observed to be a predictor of potential importance, RR: 1.06 (95% CI: 0.99 to 1.13, P = .097). When limiting the analyses to the tapering group only, none of the baseline variables were statistically significant independent predictors but SF-36 MCS was still considered to be of potential importance, RR: 1.05 (95% CI: 0.99 to 1.12, P = .098). CONCLUSION: Successful tapering is a reachable target for 1 in 3 patients with inflammatory arthritis who are interested in reducing their biological therapy. No statistically significant predictors (besides allocation to tapering) were identified. Future research on mental health and tapering is encouraged.