Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 42
Filter
1.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38833673

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Current guidelines recommend pneumococcal vaccination in individuals who are over the age of 65 or are immunosuppressed due to a disease or treatment. The objective of this study was to assess vaccine uptake rates in people with inflammatory arthritis for the pneumococcal, influenza and Covid-19 vaccines and factors determining uptake. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single centre cohort study in the UK of individuals with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and axial spondylarthritis between October and December 2023. Data were collected for age, gender, co-morbidities, immunosuppressive therapies, and dates of vaccines. Logistic regression was used to evaluate predictors of vaccine uptake, with adjustments for demographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: 906 individuals were identified. 46% were receiving treatment with csDMARD, 26% on biologic monotherapy, and 23% were on both biologic and csDMARDs. 316 individuals (35%) received a pneumococcal vaccine, lower than uptake for influenza (63%) and Covid-19 (87%) vaccines. Predictors of pneumococcal vaccine uptake included age, with older patients more likely to be vaccinated (odds ratio [OR] for age ≥ 65 years: 1.67, 95% CI 1.21-2.29). Those on biological therapy demonstrated higher likelihood of vaccination (OR for biologic therapy: 1.81, 95% CI 1.33-2.47). Additional Joint committee for immunisation and vaccination (JCVI) Green Book indicators also positively influenced vaccine uptake (OR: 1.67, 95% CI 1.19-2.33). CONCLUSION: Pneumococcal vaccine uptake in inflammatory rheumatic diseases is low, especially in younger patients and those not on biological therapy. The study highlights the need for a focused approach, distinct from strategies for other vaccines, to address this public health challenge.

2.
Br J Clin Pharmacol ; 2024 Apr 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38589944

ABSTRACT

AIMS: The COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented pressure on healthcare services. This study investigates whether disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) safety monitoring was affected during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A population-based cohort study was conducted using the OpenSAFELY platform to access electronic health record data from 24.2 million patients registered at general practices using TPP's SystmOne software. Patients were included for further analysis if prescribed azathioprine, leflunomide or methotrexate between November 2019 and July 2022. Outcomes were assessed as monthly trends and variation between various sociodemographic and clinical groups for adherence with standard safety monitoring recommendations. RESULTS: An acute increase in the rate of missed monitoring occurred across the study population (+12.4 percentage points) when lockdown measures were implemented in March 2020. This increase was more pronounced for some patient groups (70-79 year-olds: +13.7 percentage points; females: +12.8 percentage points), regions (North West: +17.0 percentage points), medications (leflunomide: +20.7 percentage points) and monitoring tests (blood pressure: +24.5 percentage points). Missed monitoring rates decreased substantially for all groups by July 2022. Consistent differences were observed in overall missed monitoring rates between several groups throughout the study. CONCLUSION: DMARD monitoring rates temporarily deteriorated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Deterioration coincided with the onset of lockdown measures, with monitoring rates recovering rapidly as lockdown measures were eased. Differences observed in monitoring rates between medications, tests, regions and patient groups highlight opportunities to tackle potential inequalities in the provision or uptake of monitoring services. Further research should evaluate the causes of the differences identified between groups.

3.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 82(8): 1059-1067, 2023 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37247942

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the association of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) with the incidence of malignancy, compared with placebo, tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors (TNFi) and methotrexate. METHODS: Systematic searches of databases were performed, to December 2022, to identify phase II/III/IV randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and long-term extension (LTE) studies of JAKi (tofacitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib, peficitinib) compared with placebo, TNFi or methotrexate, in adults with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, psoriasis, axial spondyloarthritis, inflammatory bowel disease or atopic dermatitis. Network and pairwise meta-analyses were performed to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for malignancy between JAKi and comparators. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 tool. RESULTS: In 62 eligible RCTs and 16 LTE studies, there were 82 366 person-years of exposure to JAKi, 2924 to placebo, 7909 to TNFi and 1074 to methotrexate. The overall malignancy incidence rate was 1.15 per 100 person-years in RCTs, and 1.26 per 100 person-years across combined RCT and LTE data. In network meta-analyses, the incidence of all malignancies including non-melanomatous skin cancers (NMSCs) was not significantly different between JAKi and placebo (IRR 0.71; 95% CI 0.44 to 1.15) or between JAKi and methotrexate (IRR 0.77; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.68). Compared with TNFi, however, JAKi were associated with an increased incidence of malignancy (IRR 1.50; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.94). Findings were consistent when analysing NMSC only and when analysing combined RCT/LTE data. CONCLUSIONS: JAKi were associated with a higher incidence of malignancy compared with TNFi but not placebo or methotrexate. Cancers were rare events in all comparisons. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022362630.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents , Arthritis, Rheumatoid , Janus Kinase Inhibitors , Neoplasms , Adult , Humans , Methotrexate/therapeutic use , Janus Kinase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Antirheumatic Agents/adverse effects , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/epidemiology , Neoplasms/chemically induced , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/drug therapy
4.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 62(7): 2426-2434, 2023 07 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36355461

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate associations between treat-to-target urate-lowering therapy (ULT) and hospitalizations for gout. METHODS: Using linked Clinical Practice Research Datalink and NHS Digital Hospital Episode Statistics data, we described the incidence and timing of hospitalizations for flares in people with index gout diagnoses in England from 2004-2020. Using Cox proportional hazards and propensity models, we investigated associations between ULT initiation, serum urate target attainment, colchicine prophylaxis, and the risk of hospitalizations for gout. RESULTS: Of 292 270 people with incident gout, 7719 (2.64%) had one or more hospitalizations for gout, with an incidence rate of 4.64 hospitalizations per 1000 person-years (95% CI 4.54, 4.73). There was an associated increased risk of hospitalizations within the first 6 months after ULT initiation, when compared with people who did not initiate ULT [adjusted Hazard Ratio (aHR) 4.54; 95% CI 3.70, 5.58; P < 0.001]. Hospitalizations did not differ significantly between people prescribed vs not prescribed colchicine prophylaxis in fully adjusted models. From 12 months after initiation, ULT associated with a reduced risk of hospitalizations (aHR 0.77; 95% CI 0.71, 0.83; P < 0.001). In ULT initiators, attainment of a serum urate <360 micromol/l within 12 months of initiation associated with a reduced risk of hospitalizations (aHR 0.57; 95% CI 0.49, 0.67; P < 0.001) when compared with people initiating ULT but not attaining this target. CONCLUSION: ULT associates with an increased risk of hospitalizations within the first 6 months of initiation but reduces hospitalizations in the long term, particularly when serum urate targets are achieved.


Subject(s)
Gout , Uric Acid , Humans , Cohort Studies , Gout Suppressants/therapeutic use , Gout/drug therapy , Gout/epidemiology , Gout/complications , Hospitalization , Colchicine/therapeutic use , England/epidemiology
5.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37725361

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Inflammatory arthritis (IA) causes significant work disability. Studies frequently fail to report important contextual information such as employment type. Our objective was to explore work participation, by gender and occupation type in early IA. METHODS: Data are from the National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit between 2018 and 2020. At diagnosis, clinicians collected information on demographics, IA disease activity and working status. Participants completed patient-reported outcomes at baseline, 3- and 12-months, including occupation and Work Productivity Activity Impairment (WPAI). Descriptive analyses of work participation and WPAI scores by occupational class at all timepoints were performed. Regression models examined associations between WPAI score and occupation. FINDINGS: 12 473 people received a diagnosis of IA and reported employment status, amongst whom 5,999 (47%) were in paid-work at least 20-h/week. At diagnosis, the working cohort had statistically significant lower measures of disease activity (p< 0.001). Occupation data were available for 3,694 individuals. At diagnosis, 2,793 completed a WPAI; 200 (7.2%) had stopped work and 344 (12.3%) changed jobs because of IA symptoms. There was a high burden of absenteeism (30%) and presenteeism (40%). Compared with managerial or professional workers, the burden of work disability was greater amongst those in routine (manual) occupations. During follow-up, 9.4% of WPAI completers had stopped work and 14.6% had changed roles. Work dropout occurred almost entirely amongst people doing routine jobs. CONCLUSION: IA associates with work disability within 12 months of diagnosis. It is easier to retain work in certain employment sectors. Participation in routine jobs is more affected, which may widen health inequalities.

6.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 62(9): 2979-2988, 2023 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36645234

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe the risks and predictors of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalization and mortality among patients with early inflammatory arthritis (EIA), recruited to the National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit (NEIAA). METHODS: NEIAA is an observational cohort. We included adults with EIA from Feb 2020 to May 2021. Outcomes of interest were hospitalization and death due to COVID-19, using NHS Digital linkage. Cox proportional hazards were used to calculate hazard ratios for outcomes according to initial treatment strategy, with adjustment for confounders. RESULTS: From 14 127 patients with EIA, there were 143 hospitalizations and 47 deaths due to COVID-19, with incidence rates per 100 person-years of 0.93 (95% CI 0.79, 1.10) for hospitalization and 0.30 (95% CI 0.23, 0.40) for death. Increasing age, male gender, comorbidities and ex-smoking were associated with increased risk of worse COVID-19 outcomes. Higher baseline DAS28 was not associated with COVID-19 admissions [confounder adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.10; 95% CI 0.97, 1.24] or mortality (aHR 1.11; 95% CI 0.90, 1.37). Seropositivity was not associated with either outcome. Higher symptom burden on patient-reported measures predicted worse COVID-19 outcomes. In unadjusted models, CS associated with COVID-19 death (HR 2.29; 95% CI 1.02, 5.13), and SSZ monotherapy associated with COVID-19 admission (HR 1.92; 95% CI 1.04, 3.56). In adjusted models, associations for CS and SSZ were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Patient characteristics have stronger associations with COVID-19 than the initial treatment strategy in patients with EIA. An important limitation is that we have not looked at treatment changes over time.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Rheumatoid , COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , Male , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/epidemiology , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/complications , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/complications , Hospitalization , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Female
7.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37929968

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate a strategy designed to optimise care and increase uptake of urate-lowering therapy (ULT) during hospitalisations for gout flares. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study to evaluate a strategy that combined optimal in-hospital gout management with a nurse-led, follow-up appointment, followed by handover to primary care. Outcomes, including ULT initiation, urate target attainment, and re-hospitalisation rates, were compared between patients hospitalised for flares in the 12 months post-implementation and a retrospective cohort of hospitalised patients from 12 months pre-implementation. RESULTS: 119 and 108 patients, respectively, were hospitalised for gout flares in the 12 months pre- and post-implementation. For patients with 6-month follow-up data available (n = 94 and n = 97, respectively), the proportion newly initiated on ULT increased from 49.2% pre-implementation to 92.3% post-implementation (age/sex-adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 11.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.36-30.5; p < 0.001). After implementation, more patients achieved a serum urate ≤360 micromol/L within 6 months of discharge (10.6% pre-implementation vs. 26.8% post-implementation; aOR 3.04; 95% CI 1.36-6.78; p = 0.007). The proportion of patients re-hospitalised for flares was 14.9% pre-implementation vs. 9.3% post-implementation (aOR 0.53, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.32; p = 0.18). CONCLUSION: Over 90% of patients were initiated on ULT after implementing a strategy to optimise hospital gout care. Despite increased initiation of ULT during flares, recurrent hospitalisations were not more frequent following implementation. Significant relative improvements in urate target attainment were observed post-implementation; however, for the majority of hospitalised gout patients to achieve urate targets, closer primary-secondary care integration is still needed.

8.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 61(2): 734-742, 2022 02 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33982063

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Updated guidelines for patients with axial SpA (axSpA) have sought to reduce diagnostic delay by raising awareness among clinicians. We used the National Early Inflammatory Arthritis Audit (NEIAA) to describe baseline characteristics and time to diagnosis for newly referred patients with axSpA in England and Wales. METHODS: Analyses were performed on sociodemographic and clinical metrics, including time to referral and assessment, for axSpA patients (n = 784) recruited to the NEIAA between May 2018 and March 2020. Comparators were patients recruited to the NEIAA with RA (n = 9270) or mechanical back pain (MBP; n = 370) in the same period. RESULTS: Symptom duration prior to initial rheumatology assessment was longer in axSpA than RA patients (P < 0.001) and non-significantly longer in axSpA than MBP patients (P = 0.062): 79.7% of axSpA patients had symptom durations of >6 months, compared with 33.7% of RA patients and 76.0% of MBP patients. Following referral, the median time to initial rheumatology assessment was longer for axSpA than RA patients (36 vs 24 days; P < 0.001) and similar to MBP patients (39 days; P = 0.30). Of the subset of patients deemed eligible for early inflammatory arthritis pathway follow-up, fewer axSpA than RA patients had disease education provided (77.5% vs 97.8%) and RA patients reported a better understanding of their condition and treatment. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic delay in axSpA remains a major challenge despite improved disease understanding and updated referral guidelines. Disease education is provided to fewer axSpA than RA patients, highlighting the need for specialist clinics and support programmes for axSpA patients.


Subject(s)
Axial Spondyloarthritis/diagnosis , Adult , Aged , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/diagnosis , Back Pain/diagnosis , Delayed Diagnosis , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , Time Factors , United Kingdom
9.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 62(1): 169-180, 2022 12 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35536178

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess variability in care quality and treatment outcomes across ethnicities in early inflammatory arthritis (EIA). METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study in England and Wales from May 2018 to March 2020, including patients with a suspected/confirmed EIA diagnosis. Care quality was assessed against six metrics defined by national guidelines. Clinical outcomes were measured using DAS28. Outcomes between ethnic groups ('White', 'Black', 'Asian', 'Mixed', 'Other') were compared, and adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 35 807 eligible patients were analysed. Of those, 30 643 (85.6%) were White and 5164 (14.6%) were from ethnic minorities: 1035 (2.8%) Black; 2617 (7.3%) Asian; 238 (0.6%) Mixed; 1274 (3.5%) Other. In total, 12 955 patients had confirmed EIA, of whom 11 315 were White and 1640 were from ethnic minorities: 314 (2.4%) Black; 927 (7.1%) Asian; 70 (0.5%) Mixed; 329 (2.5%) Other. A total of 14 803 patients were assessed by rheumatology within three weeks, and 5642 started treatment within six weeks of referral. There were no significant differences by ethnicity. Ethnic minority patients had lower odds of disease remission at three months [adjusted odds ratio 0.79 (95% CI: 0.65, 0.96)] relative to White patients. Ethnic minorities were significantly less likely to receive initial treatment withMTX[0.68 (0.52, 0.90)] or with glucocorticoids [0.63 (0.49, 0.80)]. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that some ethnic minorities are less likely to achieve disease remission in three months following EIA diagnosis. This is not explained by delays in referral or time to treatment. Our data highlight the need for investigation into the possible drivers of these inequitable outcomes and reappraisal of EIA management pathways.


Subject(s)
Arthritis , Ethnicity , Humans , Wales , Cohort Studies , Minority Groups , England , Arthritis/drug therapy
10.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 61(1): 90-102, 2021 12 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34247233

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Hospital admissions for gout flares have increased dramatically in recent years, despite widely available, effective medications for the treatment and prevention of flares. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of interventions in patients hospitalized for gout flares. METHODS: A search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane library, from database inception to 8 April 2021, using the terms 'gout' and 'hospital' and their synonyms. Studies were included if they evaluated the effectiveness and/or implementation of interventions during hospital admissions or emergency department attendances for gout flares. Risk of bias assessments were performed for included studies. RESULTS: Nineteen articles were included. Most studies were small, retrospective analyses performed in single centres, with concerns for bias. Eleven studies (including five randomized controlled trials) reported improved patient outcomes following pharmacological interventions with known efficacy in gout, including allopurinol, prednisolone, NSAIDs and anakinra. Eight studies reported improved outcomes associated with non-pharmacological interventions: inpatient rheumatology consultation and a hospital gout management protocol. No studies to date have prospectively evaluated strategies designed to prevent re-admissions of patients hospitalized for gout flares. CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need for high-quality, prospective studies of strategies for improving uptake of urate-lowering therapies in hospitalized patients, incorporating prophylaxis against flares and treat-to-target optimization of serum urate levels. Such studies are essential if the epidemic of hospital admissions from this treatable condition is to be countered.


Subject(s)
Gout Suppressants/therapeutic use , Gout/drug therapy , Hospitalization , Humans , Secondary Prevention , Symptom Flare Up
11.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 60(10): 4450-4462, 2021 10 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34003970

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety of treatment strategies in patients with early RA. METHODS: Systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed were conducted up to September 2020. Double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of licensed treatments conducted on completely naïve or MTX-naïve RA patients were included. Long-term extension studies, post-hoc and pooled analyses and RCTs with no comparator arm were excluded. Serious adverse events, serious infections and non-serious adverse events were extracted from all RCTs, and event rates in intervention and comparator arms were compared using meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA). RESULTS: From an initial search of 3423 studies, 20 were included, involving 9202 patients. From the meta-analysis, the pooled incidence rates per 1000 patient-years for serious adverse events were 69.8 (95% CI: 64.9, 74.8), serious infections 18.9 (95% CI: 16.2, 21.6) and non-serious adverse events 1048.2 (95% CI: 1027.5, 1068.9). NMA showed that serious adverse event rates were higher with biologic monotherapy than with MTX monotherapy, rate ratio 1.39 (95% CI: 1.12, 1.73). Biologic monotherapy rates were higher than those for MTX and steroid therapy, rate ratio 3.22 (95% CI: 1.47, 7.07). Biologic monotherapy had a higher adverse event rate than biologic combination therapy, rate ratio 1.26 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.54). NMA showed no significant difference between strategies with respect to serious infections and non-serious adverse events rates. CONCLUSION: The study revealed the different risk profiles for various early RA treatment strategies. Observed differences were overall small, and in contrast to the findings of established RA studies, steroid-based regimens did not emerge as more harmful.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Biological Products/therapeutic use , Methotrexate/therapeutic use , Steroids/therapeutic use , Adult , Double-Blind Method , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/epidemiology , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Network Meta-Analysis , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Secondary Prevention , Treatment Outcome
18.
Rheumatol Int ; 38(8): 1429-1435, 2018 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29936571

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Increasing evidence supports the role of central sensitisation in osteoarthritis (OA) pain. In this study, we used neuroimaging to compare pain-processing regions of the brain in participants with and without hand OA. We then assessed for volumetric changes in these brain regions following treatment with centrally acting analgesics. METHODS: Participants with hand OA (n = 28) underwent T1-weighted MRI of the brain before and after 12 weeks of treatment with pregabalin, duloxetine or placebo. Grey matter volume in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), insular cortex and thalamus was compared to non-OA control subjects (n = 11) using FreeSurfer regional volumetric analysis and voxel-based morphometry, and evaluated for differences pre- and post-treatment. RESULTS: Relative to non-OA controls, hand OA participants had areas of reduced grey matter volume in the ACC at baseline (p = 0.007). Regional volumetric differences in the ACC persisted after 13 weeks' treatment with pregabalin or duloxetine (p = 0.004) with no significant differences between treatment cohorts, despite improvements in NRS pain scores for pregabalin (p = 0.005) and duloxetine (p = 0.050). The ACC grey matter changes persisted despite a significant improvement in pain in the pregabalin and duloxetine groups vs. placebo. No structural differences were observed in the insular cortex or thalamus at baseline or following treatment. CONCLUSION: Our study found evidence of reduced ACC grey matter volume in participants with hand arthritis that persisted after treatment with centrally acting analgesics pregabalin and duloxetine, respectively. The sustained changes observed in the ACC in our study could reflect the relatively short duration of treatment, or that the differences observed are irreversible volume changes due to chronic pain that are established over time.


Subject(s)
Gray Matter/pathology , Gyrus Cinguli/pathology , Osteoarthritis/pathology , Aged , Analgesics/administration & dosage , Analysis of Variance , Disease Progression , Double-Blind Method , Duloxetine Hydrochloride/administration & dosage , Female , Gray Matter/diagnostic imaging , Gyrus Cinguli/diagnostic imaging , Hand Joints , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Male , Middle Aged , Osteoarthritis/drug therapy , Pain Measurement/methods , Pregabalin/administration & dosage
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL