Proton Pump Inhibitor Use and Bone Health in Patients With Rheumatic Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use on bone mineral density (BMD) and bone microarchitecture as measured by the trabecular bone score (TBS) in patients with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (iRMDs). METHODS: Cross-sectional data from a prospective single-center cohort (2015 to 2022) of patients with iRMDs were used to evaluate 3 co-primary outcomes: BMD of the left femoral neck and the lumbar spine (as T-scores) and the TBS. Inverse probability weighting adjusted for numerous confounders including age, sex, body mass index, current and cumulative glucocorticoid (GC) dose, C-reactive protein levels, disability, and others. Analyses were based on general linear models, following a prespecified statistical analysis plan. RESULTS: The study included 1495 patients (75% women; mean age, 62.6±13.1 years; 49% and 63% with regular PPI and GC use, respectively). The PPI users had lower BMD at both spine (adjusted contrast -0.25; 95% CI, -0.47 to -0.04; P=.02) and femoral neck (-0.17 [-0.35 to 0.01]; P=.07). Differences between PPI users and nonusers were statistically significant only in patients concurrently using GCs at more than 7.5 mg/d prednisone equivalent. The TBS was similar in PPI users and nonusers (adjusted contrast, 0.00 [-0.04 to 0.04]; P=.97). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that PPIs lead to a loss of BMD rather than an impairment of bone microarchitecture in patients with iRMDs. The negative association between PPI use and BMD appears to be dependent on concurrent GC use. Clinicians should carefully review the indication for PPI use in patients with iRMDs, especially in those receiving higher dose GCs.

"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.

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.

Detection of Interstitial Lung Disease in Rheumatoid Arthritis by Thoracic Ultrasound: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of thoracic ultrasound (TUS) for detecting interstitial lung disease (ILD) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with respiratory symptoms. METHODS: Individuals with RA visiting rheumatologic outpatient clinics in the Region of Southern Denmark were systematically screened for dyspnea, cough, recurrent pneumonia, prior severe pneumonia, or a chest x-ray indicating interstitial abnormalities. Eighty participants with a positive screening were consecutively included. Individuals were not eligible if they had a chest high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) less than 12 months ago or were already diagnosed with ILD. A blinded TUS expert evaluated TUS, and TUS was registered as positive for ILD if at least 10 B-lines or bilateral thickened and fragmented pleura were present. The primary outcomes were TUS's sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value and negative predictive value. An ILD-specialized thoracic radiologist assessed HRCT, followed by a multidisciplinary team discussion, which was the reference standard. The accepted window of HRCT was less than 30 days after TUS was performed. RESULTS: A total of 77 participants received HRCT less than 30 days after TUS, and 23 (30%) were diagnosed with ILD. TUS had a sensitivity of 82.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 61.2%-95.0%) and a specificity of 51.9% (95% CI 37.8%-65.7%), corresponding to a positive predictive value of 42.2% (95% CI 27.7%-57.8%) and a negative predictive value of 87.5% (95% CI 71.0%-96.5%). CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this prospective study is the first to use respiratory symptoms in RA as inclusion criteria. Systematic screening for respiratory symptoms combined with TUS can reduce the diagnostic delay of ILD in RA.

Impact of trial attrition rates on treatment effect estimates in chronic inflammatory diseases: A meta-epidemiological study.

The objective of this meta-epidemiological study was to explore the impact of attrition rates on treatment effect estimates in randomised trials of chronic inflammatory diseases (CID) treated with biological and targeted synthetic disease-modifying drugs. We sampled trials from Cochrane reviews. Attrition rates and primary endpoint results were retrieved from trial publications; Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated from the odds of withdrawing in the experimental intervention compared to the control comparison groups (i.e., differential attrition), as well as the odds of achieving a clinical response (i.e., the trial outcome). Trials were combined using random effects restricted maximum likelihood meta-regression models and associations between estimates of treatment effects and attrition rates were analysed. From 37 meta-analyses, 179 trials were included, and 163 were analysed (301 randomised comparisons; n = 62,220 patients). Overall, the odds of withdrawal were lower in the experimental compared to control groups (random effects summary OR = 0.45, 95% CI, 0.41-0.50). The corresponding overall treatment effects were large (random effects summary OR = 4.43, 95% CI 3.92-4.99) with considerable heterogeneity across interventions and clinical specialties (I2 = 85.7%). The ORs estimating treatment effect showed larger treatment benefits when the differential attrition was more prominent with more attrition in the control group (OR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.55-0.96). Higher attrition rates from the control arm are associated with larger estimated benefits of treatments with biological or targeted synthetic disease-modifying drugs in CID trials; differential attrition may affect estimates of treatment benefit in randomised trials.

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.

Weight Loss for Patients With Gout and Concomitant Obesity: A Proof-of-Concept Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Despite scarce evidence, guidelines recommend weight loss as a management strategy for patients with gout. We investigated the effect of an intensive dietary intervention on body weight and clinical measures of gout severity in individuals with obesity and gout. METHODS: We conducted a 16-week randomized nonmasked parallel-group trial in Denmark, randomly assigning (one-to-one) individuals with obesity and gout to a low-energy diet or a control diet. The primary outcome was change in body weight. Key secondary outcomes were changes in serum urate (SU) level and visual analog scale-assessed pain and fatigue. RESULTS: Between December 1, 2018, and June 1, 2019, 61 participants were included in the intention-to-treat population and randomly assigned to the intensive diet group (n = 29) or control diet group (n = 32). Participants had a mean age of 60.3 (SD 9.9) years and mean body mass index of 35.6 (SD 5.0), and 59 (97%) were men. After 16 weeks, there was a significant difference in change in body weight between the diet and control groups (-15.4 vs -7.7 kg; difference -7.7 kg [95% confidence interval -10.7 to -4.7], P < 0.001). Despite results being potentially in favor of a low-energy diet, we could not confirm differences in SU level changes and fatigue between groups. No differences in pain and gout flares were observed between groups. No serious adverse events or deaths occurred during the trial. CONCLUSION: An intensive dietary intervention was safe and effectively lowered body weight in people with obesity and gout, but the weight loss did not directly translate into effects on SU level, fatigue, and pain.

Continuing versus tapering low-dose glucocorticoids in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus in states of low disease activity or remission: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.

OBJECTIVES: To study the benefit and harm associated with continuing versus tapering low-dose glucocorticoids (GCs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) who have achieved low disease activity/remission. METHODS: A protocolised (PROSPEROCRD42022325175) systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials was performed. Trials compared, in patients with low disease activity/remission and GCs at baseline, continued low-dose GCs (≤7.5 mg/d prednisone equivalent) with a taper. Co-primary outcomes were time to flare and adverse events (AEs), accompanied by secondary benefit and harm outcomes. We performed meta-analyses and evaluated risk of bias and quality of evidence (QoE). Subgroup analyses were conducted for patients with RA. RESULTS: Four trials (three: RA; one: SLE; study duration 24-104 weeks) with 472 participants were included. Tapering GCs resulted in a shorter time to flare (hazard ratio 3.41 [95 %-CI 1.96-5.93]; p<0.01; very low QoE). The risks of AEs, serious AEs, and withdrawal due to AEs were similar in both groups (very low to low QoE). There were more withdrawals due to lack of efficacy with tapered GCs (risk ratio 3.02 [1.56-5.87]; low QoE). In RA, the disease activity score-28 was lower with continued GCs (mean difference 0.49 [0.07-0.91]; low QoE). One of 238 patients in the tapering groups experienced adrenal insufficiency. Subgroup analyses yielded consistent results. CONCLUSION: In RA and SLE with low disease activity, continuing low-dose GCs may provide better sustained disease control, but QoE is insufficient. Adrenal insufficiency is very rare when tapering low-dose GCs. Longer-term safety concerns for GCs remain.

Exploring the complexities of pain phenotypes: OMERACT 2023 chronic pain working group workshop.

OBJECTIVE: To educate and discuss pain mechanisms (nociceptive, neuropathic, nociplastic) illuminating its possible impact when measuring different outcomes, which may modify, confound and potentially bias the outcome measures applied across various aspects of Rheumatic Musculoskeletal Diseases (RMDs) clinical trials. METHODS: In the plenary presentations, PM lectured on different pain mechanisms and impact on disease activity assessment. Data from two data sets of RMDs patients, which assessed the prevalence and impact of nociplastic pain were presented and reviewed. Audience breakout group sessions and polling were conducted. RESULTS: Mixed pain etiologies may differentially influence disease activity assessment and therapeutic decision-making. Polling demonstrated a consensus on the need to assess different types of pain as a phenotype, as it constitutes an important contextual factor (a variable that is not an outcome of the trial, but needs to be recognized [and measured] to understand the study results), and to standardize across RMDs. CONCLUSION: There is need for a standardized pain measure that can differentiate underlying pain mechanisms.

Stakeholder endorsement advancing the implementation of a patient-reported domain for harms in rheumatology clinical trials: Outcome of the OMERACT Safety Working Group.

OBJECTIVES: To develop an understanding of the concept of safety/harms experienced by patients involved in clinical trials for their rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) and to seek input from the OMERACT community before moving forward to developing or selecting an outcome measurement instrument. METHODS: OMERACT 2023 presented and discussed interview results from 34 patients indicating that up to 171 items might be important for patients' harm-reporting. RESULTS: Domain was defined in detail and supported by qualitative work. Participants in the Special-Interest-Group endorsed (96 %) that enough qualitative data are available to start Delphi survey(s). CONCLUSION: We present a definition of safety/harms that represents the patient voice (i.e., patients' perception of safety) evaluating the symptomatic treatment-related adverse events for people with RMDs enrolled in clinical trials.

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 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.

Sex and age do not modify the association between glucocorticoids and bone mineral density in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether sex or age modify the association of glucocorticoid (GC) use with reduced bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: We studied cross-sectional data of RA patients with current or previous GC treatment in a single center cohort study (Rh-GIOP cohort). Our primary outcome was the minimum T-score (measured by DXA) of either lumbar spine, total femur, or femoral neck. Current GC dose was the main exposure; cumulative GC dose and cumulative duration of GC use were also assessed. Following a predefined statistical analysis plan, linear regression analyses with adjustment for confounders assessed whether the association of GC use with BMD was modified by sex (men versus women) or age (≥ 65 versus < 65 years). RESULTS: Four hundred eighty-three patients with RA (mean age 64 ± 12 years, 80% women) were included. 33% were not currently taking GCs, 32% were treated with a dose of 5 mg/d prednisone equivalent and 11% with more than 7.5 mg/d. 23% of patients had osteoporosis by DXA (minimum T-score ≤ -2.5). The slope, i.e., the association between changes in minimum T-scores with 1 mg/d change in current GC dose, was similar in men and women (-0.07 and -0.04, respectively; difference -0.03 [-0.11 to 0.04]; p for interaction = 0.41). Slopes were also similar for elderly and non-elderly patients (-0.03 and -0.04, respectively; difference -0.01 [-0.06 to 0.05]; p for interaction = 0.77). Using cumulative dose and duration of use as exposures did not lead to substantial changes of these results. CONCLUSIONS: In our sample, the association of GC use with reduced BMD in RA was not modified by sex or age.

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.

Biopsychosocial Rehabilitation for Inflammatory Arthritis and Osteoarthritis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefits and harms associated with biopsychosocial rehabilitation in patients with inflammatory arthritis and osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. Data were collected through electronic searches of Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, and CINAHL databases up to March 2019. Trials examining the effect of biopsychosocial rehabilitation in adults with inflammatory arthritis and/or OA were considered eligible, excluding rehabilitation adjunct to surgery. The primary outcome for benefit was pain and total withdrawals for harm. RESULTS: Of the 27 trials meeting the eligibility criteria, 22 trials (3,750 participants) reported sufficient data to be included in the quantitative synthesis. For patient-reported outcome measures, biopsychosocial rehabilitation was slightly superior to control for pain relief (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.19 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) -0.31, -0.07]), had a small effect on patient global assessment score (SMD -0.13 [95% CI -0.26, -0.00]), with no apparent effect on health-related quality of life, fatigue, self-reported disability/physical function, mental well-being, and reduction in pain intensity ≥30%. Clinician-measured outcomes displayed a small effect on observed disability/physical function (SMD -0.34 [95% CI -0.57, -0.10]), a large effect on physician global assessment score (SMD -0.72 [95% CI -1.18, -0.26]), and no effect on inflammation. No difference in harms existed in terms of the number of withdrawals, adverse events, or serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: Biopsychosocial rehabilitation produces a significant but clinically small beneficial effect on patient-reported pain among patients with inflammatory arthritis and OA, with no difference in harm. Methodologic weaknesses were observed in the included trials, suggesting low-to-moderate confidence in the estimates of effect.

Physicians' vs patients' global assessments of disease activity in rheumatology and musculoskeletal trials: A meta-research project with focus on reasons for discrepancies.

BACKGROUND: In most rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), global assessments of disease activity by physicians and patients are 'anchor outcomes' in therapeutic trials evaluating whether a treatment is effective. OBJECTIVES: To compare physicians' vs patients' global assessments of disease activity in RMD trials and explore reasons for discrepancies between them. METHODS: Eligible trials were sampled from systematic reviews of treatments for RMDs by using the Cochrane database of systematic reviews (i.e., reviews from the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group, [CMSG]). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for RMDs were eligible if they reported quantitative analyses of both physicians´ and patients´ global assessments at the same time point for the comparison of the same experimental intervention against the same comparator (i.e., placebo, no treatment, or other treatment). We accepted data from trial comparisons for each type of outcome, regardless of the type of intervention and type of RMD within the CMSG. Using mixed-effects meta-regression models, we assigned the dependent variable as the ratio of odds ratios (ROR) of global change with the experimental intervention, versus the control comparator. An ROR>1 would indicate that physicians rated the experimental intervention more favorable than their patients did. RESULTS: We were able to estimate the ROR (data from both physicians' and patients' global assessments) across 70 trials (116 randomized comparisons) in 7 diseases (ankylosing spondylitis, fibromyalgia, psoriatic arthritis, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, and gout). The combined ROR across all effectiveness comparisons were rated significantly in favor of the intervention by physicians: ROR=1.15 CI 95% (1.07 to 1.23). This combined ROR was based on a substantial heterogeneity across comparisons (I2=89.1%). Across all the stratified analyses, the type of the RMD was an informative reason for discrepancies, with a statistically significant ROR in rheumatoid arthritis ROR=1.33, CI 95% (1.13 to 1.56), unlike the ROR in all other conditions (ROR=1.04, CI 95% (0.95-1.14). CONCLUSION: In comparative effectiveness research on rheumatology, physicians' global assessments of disease activity, surprisingly, are more in favor of the experimental interventions than are those of the patients.

Placebo response and effect in randomized clinical trials: meta-research with focus on contextual effects.

BACKGROUND: Contextual effects (i.e., placebo response) refer to all health changes resulting from administering an apparently inactive treatment. In a randomized clinical trial (RCT), the overall treatment effect (i.e., the post-treatment effect in the intervention group) can be regarded as the true effect of the intervention plus the impact of contextual effects. This meta-research was conducted to examine the average proportion of the overall treatment effect attributable to contextual effects in RCTs across clinical conditions and treatments and explore whether it varies with trial contextual factors. METHODS: Data was extracted from trials included in the main meta-analysis from the latest update of the Cochrane review on "Placebo interventions for all clinical conditions" (searched from 1966 to March 2008). Only RCTs reported in English having an experimental intervention group, a placebo comparator group, and a no-treatment control group were eligible. RESULTS: In total, 186 trials (16,655 patients) were included. On average, 54% (0.54, 95%CI 0.46 to 0.64) of the overall treatment effect was attributable to contextual effects. The contextual effects were higher for trials with blinded outcome assessor and concealed allocation. The contextual effects appeared to increase proportional to the placebo effect, lower mean age, and proportion of females. CONCLUSION: Approximately half of the overall treatment effect in RCTs seems attributable to contextual effects rather than to the specific effect of treatments. As the study did not include all important contextual factors (e.g., patient-provider interaction), the true proportion of contextual effects could differ from the study's results. However, contextual effects should be considered when assessing treatment effects in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019130257 . Registered on April 19, 2019.

Towards development of core domain sets for short term and long term studies of calcium pyrophosphate crystal deposition (CPPD) disease: A framework paper by the OMERACT CPPD working group.

INTRODUCTION: Although calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) is common, there are no published outcome domains or validated measurement instruments for CPPD studies. In this paper, we describe the framework for development of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) CPPD Core Domain Sets. METHODS: The OMERACT CPPD working group performed a scoping literature review and qualitative interview study. Generated outcomes were presented at the 2020 OMERACT CPPD virtual Special Interest Group (SIG) meeting with discussion focused on whether different core domain sets should be developed for different calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) clinical presentations and how the future CPPD Core Domain Set may overlap with already established osteoarthritis (OA) domains. These discussions informed development of a future work plan for development of the OMERACT CPPD Core Domain Sets. FINDINGS: Domains identified from a scoping review of 112 studies and a qualitative interview study of 36 people (28 patients with CPPD, 7 health care professionals, one stakeholder) were mapped to core areas of OMERACT Filter 2.1. The majority of SIG participants agreed there was need to develop separate core domain sets for "short term" and "long term" studies of CPPD. Although CPPD + OA is common and core domain sets for OA have been established, participants agreed that existing OA core domain sets should not influence the development of OMERACT core domain sets for CPPD. Prioritization exercises (using Delphi methodology) will consider 40 potential domains for short term studies of CPPD and 47 potential domains for long term studies of CPPD. CONCLUSION: Separate OMERACT CPPD Core Domain Sets will be developed for "short term" studies for an individual flare of acute CPP crystal arthritis and for "long term" studies that may include participants with any clinical presentation of CPPD (acute CPP crystal arthritis, chronic CPP crystal inflammatory arthritis, and/or CPPD + OA).

Effect Modifiers and Statistical Tests for Interaction in Randomized Trials.

Statistical analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) yield a causally valid estimate of the overall treatment effect, which is the contrast between the outcomes in two randomized treatment groups commonly accompanied by a confidence interval. In addition, the trial investigators may want to examine whether the observed treatment effect varies across patient subgroups (also called 'heterogeneity of treatment effects'), i.e. whether the treatment effect is modified by the value of a variable assessed at baseline. The statistical approach for this evaluation of potential effect modifiers is a test for statistical interaction to evaluate whether the treatment effect varies across levels of the effect modifier. In this article, we provide a concise and nontechnical explanation of the use of simple statistical tests for interaction to identify effect modifiers in RCTs. We explain how to calculate the test of interaction by hand, applied to a dataset with simulated data on 1,000 imaginary participants for illustration.

One-year intensive lifestyle intervention and improvements in health-related quality of life and mental health in persons with type 2 diabetes: a secondary analysis of the U-TURN randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The effects of lifestyle interventions in persons with type 2 diabetes (T2D) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and subjective well-being are ambiguous, and no studies have explored the effect of exercise interventions that meet or exceed current recommended exercise levels. We investigated whether a 1-year intensive lifestyle intervention is superior in improving HRQoL compared with standard care in T2D persons. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed secondary analyses of a previously conducted randomized controlled trial (April 2015 to August 2016). Persons with non-insulin-dependent T2D (duration ≤10 years) were randomized to 1-year supervised exercise and individualized dietary counseling (ie, 'U-TURN'), or standard care. The primary HRQoL outcome was change in the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component score (PCS) from baseline to 12 months of follow-up, and a key secondary outcome was changes in the SF-36 mental component score (MCS). RESULTS: We included 98 participants (U-TURN group=64, standard care group=34) with a mean age of 54.6 years (SD 8.9). Between-group analyses at 12-month follow-up showed SF-36 PCS change of 0.8 (95% CI -0.7 to 2.3) in the U-TURN group and deterioration of 2.4 (95% CI -4.6 to -0.1) in the standard care group (difference of 3.2, 95% CI 0.5 to 5.9, p=0.02) while no changes were detected in SF-36 MCS. At 12 months, 19 participants (30%) in the U-TURN group and 6 participants (18%) in the standard care group achieved clinically significant improvement in SF-36 PCS score (adjusted risk ratio 2.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 4.5 corresponding to number needed to treat of 4, 95% CI 1.6 to infinite). CONCLUSION: In persons with T2D diagnosed for less than 10 years, intensive lifestyle intervention improved the physical component of HRQoL, but not the mental component of HRQoL after 1 year, compared with standard care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02417012.