Psoriatic arthropathy in patients with previous neoplasia: a case series of four patients treated with secukinumab and literature review.

OBJECTIVE: Psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) are closely linked to cancer, as supported by the literature. Systemic treatments for psoriasis and PsA, namely non-biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), have been associated with increased cancer risk in both conditions. New, more effective biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) do not seem to be associated with higher overall cancer risk compared to those not receiving bDMARDs, opening up possibilities for treating patients with previous or ongoing oncological disease alongside psoriasis and PsA. However, limited literature exists on treating PsA patients with cancer with bDMARDs. This study aims to assess the safety of secukinumab, a bDMARD, in patients with PsA and concurrent cancer. Here, we describe a case series of four patients with PsA treated with bDMARD secukinumab and review the literature on the subject. CASE SERIES: We assessed the laboratory parameters and clinical characteristics of 4 patients with PsA treated with the bDMARD secukinumab and followed up until 30 months. Three patients had oncological disease in remission, while one had active neoplasia. No cancer progression was observed during the treatment of these patients with secukinumab. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, our case series, consisting of four PsA patients with concurrent neoplasia treated with secukinumab, showed no evidence of cancer progression and represents the first case of PsA described in the literature treated during active oncological disease, lending support to the safety of secukinumab for the treatment of patients with PsA and concomitant neoplasia.

Anti-tumor necrosis factor α: originators versus biosimilars, comparison in clinical response assessment in a multicenter cohort of patients with inflammatory arthropathies.

OBJECTIVE: To compare etanercept and adalimumab biosimilars (SB4 and ABP501) and respective bioriginators in terms of safety and efficacy in a real-life contest. METHODS: We consequently enrolled patients affected by rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis, treated with SB4, and ABP501, or with corresponding originators, belonging to the main biological prescribing centers in the Lazio region (Italy), from 2017 to 2020. Data were collected at recruitment and after 4, 8, 12, and 24 months of therapy. RESULTS: The multicenter cohort was composed by 455 patients treated with biosimilars [SB4/ABP501 276/179; female/male 307/146; biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (b-DMARD) naïve 56%, median age/ interquartile range 55/46-65 years] and 436 treated with originators (etanercept/adalimumab 186/259, female/ male 279/157, b-DMARD naïve 67,2%, median age/interquartile range 53/43-62 years). No differences were found about safety, but the biosimilar group presented more discontinuations due to inefficacy (p<0.001). Female gender, being a smoker, and being b-DMARD naïve were predictive factors of reduced drug survival (p=0.05, p=0.046, p=0.001 respectively). The retention rate at 24 months was 81.1% for bioriginators and 76.5% for biosimilars (median retention time of 20.7 and 18.9 months, respectively) (p=0.002). Patients with remission/low disease activity achievement at 4 months showed a cumulative survival of 90% to biosimilar therapy until 24 months (p=0.001); early adverse reactions instead represented a cause of subsequent drug discontinuation (p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Real-life data demonstrated a similar safety profile between biosimilars and originators, but a reduced biosimilar retention rate at 24 months. Biosimilars could be considered a valid, safe, and less expensive alternative to originators, allowing access to treatments for a wider patient population.

Unmet needs on the current medical management of Cushing's syndrome: results from a Delphi panel of Italian endocrinologists.

BACKGROUND: Cushing's syndrome (CS) is a rare clinical condition caused by excessive cortisol secretion from adrenal glands. CS is associated with increased mortality and morbidity; therefore, a prompt diagnosis and an effective therapeutic approach are strongly necessary to improve the patient's clinical management. The first-line treatment for CS is surgery, while medical treatment has historically played a minor role. However, thanks to the availability of novel compounds, the possibility of improving hypercortisolism control using different drug combinations emerged. PURPOSE: No absolute recommendations are available to guide the therapeutic choice for patients with CS and, consequently, the awareness of unmet needs in CS management is growing. Although new data from clinical trials are needed to better define the most appropriate management of CS, an expert consensus approach can help define unmet needs and optimize the current CS management and treatment. METHODS: Twenty-seven endocrinologists from 12 Italian regions, working among the main Italian referral centers for hospital endocrinology where they take care of CS patients, were involved in a consensus process and used the Delphi method to reach an agreement on 24 statements about managing CS patients. RESULTS: In total, 18 statements reached a consensus. Some relevant unmet needs in the management of CS were reported, mainly related to the lack of a pharmacological treatment successful for the majority of patients. CONCLUSION: While acknowledging the difficulty in achieving complete disease control, a significant change in CS management requires the availability of medical treatment with improved efficacy and safety over available therapeutic options at the time of the current study.

Impact of Covid-19 pandemic on injection-based practice: report from an Italian multicenter and multidisciplinary survey.

Background: There are no papers exploring the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the injection-based practice in patients affected by different rheumatic diseases, including osteoarthritis. The aim was to investigate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on injection-based practice trough the Italian country. Study design: A survey-based retrospective cross-sectional study. Methods: An Italian-language questionnaire was developed by a group of senior researchers and distributed by e-mail to some Rheumatology, Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Units from different geographic areas of Italy. The survey included information about the number of injections performed during COVID-19 pandemic (stratified by injected agents and injected joint), in comparison to the pre-pandemic period, and the possible reasons behind an eventual reduction. Responses were collected and descriptive analysis calculated. Results: Eleven centers of the National Health Service completed the survey. The activities of the injections services significantly decreased across the country with a percentage of reduction of 60% compared to the pre-pandemic period. A significant reduction of both intra-articular and peri-articular injections was registered. Among intra-articular. treatments, the most affected ones were the hyaluronic acid injections, when compared to corticosteroids. A significant decrease of the total amount of peri-articular injections was observed. The strict government restrictions and the fear of patients to become infected represented the most limiting factors. Conclusions: The reported decrease of the injection-based practice in our country during the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the detrimental effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of chronic musculoskeletal diseases with possible negative consequences in terms of disability and quality of life.

Intradermal therapy (mesotherapy): the lower the better.

BACKGROUND: Intradermal therapy (mesotherapy) is a technique used to inject drugs into the surface layer of the skin. The intradermal micro deposit allows to modulate the kinetics of drugs, slowing down its absorption and prolonging the local mechanism of action. This technique is applied in the treatment of some forms of localized pain when a systemic drug-saving effect is useful, when it is necessary to synergize with other pharmacological or non-pharmacological thera-pies, when other therapies have failed or cannot be used. AIM: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the effect of a mixture with respect to its lower concentration. We also wanted to evaluate the number of sessions needed to reach the therapeutic goal (50% reduction in pain from baseline) in patients with acute or chronic neck pain. METHOD: We analyzed retrospectively data from 62 patients with cervicobrachial pain treated with intradermal drugs. Group A received a mixture of drugs; group B received half the dose of drugs. RESULTS: Patients who received a lower concentration of drugs achieved similar results to those who received a higher dose. The therapeutic goal was achieved on average with 3.5 + 1.7 sessions on a weekly basis (min 1; max 9). Subjects in group A required 4+1.7 treatments (min 1; max 9), while subjects in group B required 3+1.5 treatments (min 1; max 7). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms that even a lower dose of drugs can induce a clinically useful result. This study confirms that the useful effect of mesotherapy is only partly due to the pharmacological action. Further randomized prospective studies are needed to standardize the technique in the various pain syndromes, but it is recommended to follow the guidelines of the Italian Society of Mesotherapy to ensure patients receive appropriate treatment.

Biologics for psoriatic arthritis: network meta-analysis in review.

OBJECTIVE: A review of network meta-analysis to assess efficacy and safety of biologics for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search was conducted on electronic databases to identify Bayesian meta-analysis reporting clinical parameters of efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of biologics that are approved for the treatment of PsA patients. RESULTS: We identified 19 studies and included them for review. There is insufficient statistical evidence to demonstrate clear differences in effectiveness between available biologic agents for PsA due to many differences in methods and clinical parameters reported in the studies. Old biologics are reported to be safe. CONCLUSIONS: New molecules approved for the treatment of PsA appear promising treatments but further comparative studies methodologically well-conducted are necessary. It is also necessary to follow strictly international recommendations to conduct NMA to better help physicians and decision-makers in making appropriate decisions.

Systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of episodic cluster headache drugs.

OBJECTIVE: The drugs used in Europe to treat episodic cluster headache (eCH) are mainly verapamil and lithium carbonate, even though topiramate and pizotifen can be used. Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody was approved by FDA recently for prophylaxis treatment of eCH. In order to evaluate the efficacy of galcanezumab compared to the drugs used for the preventive treatment of eCH, a systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) of only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library including RCTs and observational studies was conducted. The primary outcomes for the NMA included the main change from baseline in reducing ECH attacks while the percentage of responders was used to pairwise comparisons of the observational studies. The NMA was conducted using a fixed-effect model and a random-effects model with deviance information criterion (DIC) reported for both models. The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) was shown only for the model with the lower DIC. RESULTS: Three RCTs and six observational studies were included in the SLR. The Bayesian NMA was performed on the two RCTs included in the SLR, specifically galcanezumab and verapamil studies. SUCRA indicated that galcanezumab had the highest probability of being the most effective treatment (probability = 66.33%) compared to verapamil (probability = 31.58%) and placebo (probability = 2.09%). Galcanezumab was also the treatment with the highest overall probability to be the second most effective (probability = 88.79%). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that galcanezumab is more effective compared to verapamil as a prophylaxis treatment for reducing eCH attacks in adults. Further, head-to-head RCTs of galcanezumab vs. treatments using in clinical practice are needed to better assess its comparative efficacy and benefit-risk profile.

Differences in biologics for treating ankylosing spondylitis: the contribution of network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS) is a chronic form of arthritis of unknown origin affecting the spine. In this study, we aimed to identify clinical and safety profiles of adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, and secukinumab that are biologic agents (biologics) mainly used for the treatment of AS, and to understand differences between them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An extensive literature research was performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE in order to identify all network meta-analysis (NMA) and/or mixed treatment comparison (MTC) papers. NMA and/or MTC, with a ranking of the effectiveness of biologics in AS, were included in the analysis, and the adhesion to ISPOR guidelines was investigated. RESULTS: 60 studies were identified; after applying exclusion criteria methods, 7 studies underwent further analysis. Infliximab was the drug that exhibited the highest probability for achieving clinical efficacy by ASAS20 at 12 and 24 weeks. Considering only subcutaneous biologics, Golimumab achieved the highest probability for achieving the ASAS20 response at 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Results from NMA on the use of biologics in AS indicates infliximab emerged as the drug with the highest probability of obtaining ASAS20 response both at 12 and 24 weeks of treatment.

Evidence based recommendations on mesotherapy: an update from the Italian society of Mesotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Mesotherapy, also known as local intradermal therapy, widely used all over the world, is a technique used to inject substances into the surface layer of the skin. There are no international guidelines for the correct use of this technique and in many countries, it is still applied empirically without valid patient consent. The Italian society of mesotherapy has planned a study to assess the rationale and clinical applications based on current evidence. METHODS: An independent steering committee, based on the available scientific literature, has formulated a series of clinical questions. 21 experts responded by writing an evidence-based document. From this document 30 statements were obtained which were presented to 114 experts using the Delphi method. RESULTS: 28 statements reached a broad agreement on definition, technique, pharmacological rationale, indications and some crucial ethical aspect. CONCLUSIONS: Although further studies are needed to establish the clinical role of this technique in each field of application, our statements recommend the correct application according to the needs of the individual patient in full respect of ethics.

A review of network meta-analysis comparing biologics in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: Even though in recent years significant improvements have been made in the management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis due to the introduction of biologic agents, it is still difficult to identify the most effective and safest available treatment. The choice and comparison between biological agents are a challenge, for only limited head-to-head clinical studies are available. The aim of this manuscript is to review the published network meta-analysis (NMA) to gain a better understanding of efficacy and safety of biological agents and small molecules in the management of RA patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify network meta-analyses from 2008 to June 2019 comparing efficacy and safety of licensed biological agents and tsDMARDS at the approved dosages using predefined text words related to the topic. The following scenarios have been investigated: patients not responding to csDMARD (cDMARDs - IR); csDMARD naïve patients; patients not responding to biologics (bDMARDs - IR); patients in biological monotherapy. RESULTS: On the basis of the data present in the literature, we are able to hypothesize some trends of response in terms of efficacy in different subsets of patients, for example patients in monotherapy, bDMARds unresponsive patients, and Methotrexate-naive patients. The differences of the results presented in many works are due to the different inclusion criteria used in the studies, the type of biologics agent used in each study (according to the available molecules in the different years of publication), as well as differences in the methodology of NMA and in the presentation of the data. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that the next NMA follows the indications suggested by the Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) so that the results are comparable and comprehensible.

A cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of apremilast in patients with psoriatic arthritis in Italy.

Aims: The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis, as well as a budget impact analysis, on the use of apremilast for the treatment of adult patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), within the Italian National Health Service (NHS).Methods: A Markov state transition cohort model, which was adapted to the Italian context, was used to compare the costs of the currently available treatments and of the patients' quality of life with two alternative treatment sequences, with or without apremilast as pre-biologic therapy. Moreover, a budget impact model was developed based on the population of patients treated for PsA in Italy, who can be eligible for treatment with apremilast. The eligible population was represented by adult patients with PsA who had an inadequate response to or were intolerant to previous disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), for the approved indication, and for the treatment studied in the economic analytic model.Results: This cost-effectiveness analysis estimated that the strategy of using apremilast before biologic therapy is cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €32,263.00 per QALY gained which is slightly over the normal threshold found in other Italian economic studies, which usually considers a 40-year-period. Conversely, the budget impact analysis was conducted over 3 years, and it led to an estimated annual saving of €1.6 million, €4.6 million and €5.5 million in the first, second and third year of apremilast commercialization, respectively, for a total saving of €11.75 million in 3 years.Limitations: Limitations of this analysis include the absence of head-to-head trials comparing therapies included in the economic model, the lack of comparative long-term data on treatment efficacy, and the assumption of complete independence between the considered response rates to therapy.Conclusion: The use of apremilast as a first option before the use of biologic agents may represent a cost-effective treatment strategy for patients with PsA who fail to respond to, or are intolerant to, previous DMARD therapy. In addition, based on a budget impact perspective, the use of apremilast may lead to cost savings to the Italian healthcare system.

A cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of apremilast in patients with psoriasis in the Italian setting.

Aims: The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis, as well as a budget impact analysis, on the use of apremilast for the treatment of adult patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (defined as a psoriasis area severity index [PASI] ≥ 10), who failed to respond to, had a contraindication to, or were intolerant to other systemic therapies, within the Italian National Health Service (NHS).Materials and methods: A Markov state-transition cohort model adapted to the Italian context was used to compare the costs of the currently available treatments and of the patients' quality of life with two alternative treatment sequences, with or without apremilast as pre-biologic therapy. Moreover, a budget impact model was developed based on the population of patients treated for psoriasis in Italy, who would be eligible for treatment with apremilast.Results: Over 5 years, the cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the strategy of using apremilast before biologic therapy was dominant compared with the sequence of biologic treatments without apremilast. In addition, it is important to underline that the use of apremilast slightly increases the quality-adjusted life years gained over 5 years. Furthermore, within the budget impact analysis, the strategy including apremilast would lead to a saving of €16 million within 3 years. Savings would mainly be related to a reduction in pharmaceutical spending, hospital admissions and other drug administration-related costs.Conclusion: These models proved to be robust to variation in parameters and it suggested that the use of apremilast would lead to savings to the Italian healthcare system with potential benefits in terms of patients' quality of life.

It Is the Time to Think About a Treat-to-Target Strategy for Knee Osteoarthritis.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a rheumatic disease that affects the well-being of the patient, compromises physical and mental function, and affects other quality of life aspects. In the literature, several evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for the management of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) are available. These recommendations list the different therapeutic options rather than addressing a hierarchy between the treatments and defining the real target. Therefore, a question arises: are patients and physicians satisfied with the current management of KOA? Actually, the answer may be negative, thus suggesting a change in our therapeutic strategies. In this article, we address this challenge by suggesting that it is time to develop a "treat to target strategy" for KOA.

One-year follow-up showing effects of single intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid (1,500-2,000 kDa) in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.

Clinical evidence on knee osteoarthritis suggests that intra-articular administration of hyaluronic acid may be useful in the management of patients with persistent pain. This study assesses the duration of effectiveness of a single intra-articular hyaluronic acid injection in a large population of patients with knee osteoarthritis. This retrospective post-marketing cohort study collected data from the ANTIAGE Registry (http://www.antiagefbf.it/registro), selecting patients of age ≥ 40 years, with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence grade I-III) of ≥ 12 months duration, and ≥12 months of follow-up. Patients had received a single intra-articular injection of high molecular weight hyaluronic acid (1,500-2,000 kDa) at baseline. WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index total scores measured using the LK 3.1 scale and 10 cm VAS pain scores were evaluated before IA Injection and at 6, 9, 10, 11 and 12 months. Blood cell counts, uricemia, erythrocyte sedimentation rates and levels of C-reactive protein were measured at baseline and 12 months. Time from initial treatment to second injection up to 12 months was recorded to assess event-free survival. Included patients (n=187) were 53.5% female and had a mean (±SD) age at baseline of 62 (±16.6) years and mean (±SD) body mass index of 26.2 (±2.5) kg/m2. Mean (±SD) WOMAC index total score and VAS pain scores were 60.9 (±7.1) and 5.9 cm (±1.8), respectively. There were statistically significant reductions compared to baseline in mean WOMAC index total score and VAS pain score at all time points (p less than0.01 at 6 and 9 months; p less than 0.05 at 10, 11 and 12 months for both parameters). These results support the clinical effectiveness and safety of hyaluronic acid for up to 12 months for pain relief and function improvement in patients with knee osteoarthritis, confirming previous data on intra-articular administration of hyaluronic acid as chronic therapy in the management of knee osteoarthritis.

Are Dietary Supplements and Nutraceuticals Effective for Musculoskeletal Health and Cognitive Function? A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our scoping review was to summarize the state of the art regarding micronutrients in order to identify which of them might effectively improve health status in the areas typically impaired in older people: bone, skeletal muscle, and cognitive function. DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: The Italian Study Group on Healthy Aging by Nutraceuticals and Dietary Supplements (HANDS) performed this scoping review, based on the following steps: doing a list of micronutrients related with musculoskeletal or cognitive functions, included in dietary supplements and nutraceuticals commercialized in Italy; planning a research on PubMed, according to an evidence-based approach, in order to the most relevant positive study for each micronutrient into each of the three areas involved (bone, skeletal muscle and cognitive function); identifying the micronutrients effective in maintaining or achieving an adequate health status in older people, specifying the effective and safe daily doses, according to the selected studies. RESULTS: In literature we found 12 relevant positive studies (1 international society guidelines/recommendations, 1 systematic review, 7 randomized controlled trials, and 3 prospective cohort studies). We showed that only 16 micronutrients resulted to have appropriate scientific evidences in terms of improving musculoskeletal health and/or cognitive function in older people: beta-alanine, calcium, creatine, fluorides, leucine, magnesium, omega-3 fatty acids, potassium, vitamin B6, vitamin B9, vitamin B12, vitamin C, vitamin D, vitamin E, vitamin K2, and zinc. CONCLUSION: This scoping review showed that selected micronutrients in adequate doses might have an ancillary role in musculoskeletal health and cognitive functions in older people.

HyalOne® in the treatment of symptomatic hip OA - data from the ANTIAGE register: seven years of observation.

OBJECTIVE: Several studies on knee osteoarthritis suggest that the intra-articular administration of hyaluronic acid products may be a relevant option in the management of patients with persistent pain. The aim of this study is to report the data of efficacy of US-guided HyalOne®/Hyalubrix® 60 injections in a large population of patients with hip osteoarthritis, repeated at least 2 times per year for up to seven years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a prospective, post-marketing, cohort study. Data were collected from the ANTIAGE registry. Values of Lequesne index, pain VAS, NSAIDs intake, global medical and patients assessments were evaluated every six months from the baseline to the end of the follow-up, seven years later. The inclusion criteria were: age ≥18 years, symptomatic hip osteoarthritis of at least 1-year duration, and up to 84 months of follow-up. All the patients received hyaluronic acid injections at least every six months, using ultrasound guidance to ensure accurate placement. RESULTS: 1022 patients were included in the study. The patients were categorized by age classes, gender, and body mass index (BMI). All the groups show a statistically significant reduction at all time points compared to baseline values of Lequesne index, pain VAS, NSAIDs intake, global medical and patients assessments. There are slight differences in the subgroups of overweighted, obese and over 70 years patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports the clinical efficacy and safety of HyalOne®/Hyalubrix®60 in patients affected by osteoarthritis. This is the first study, reporting on a large cohort of patients in different categories with a long follow-up on seven years. The data confirm the proper use of ultrasound-guided viscosupplementation (VS) as background therapy in the management of hip osteoarthritis.

An open randomized active-controlled clinical trial with low-dose SKA cytokines versus DMARDs evaluating low disease activity maintenance in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

BACKGROUND: Biologic agents are currently the strongest immunosuppressive drugs able to induce remission in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). One of the objectives of the medical scientific community now is how to maintain remission or low disease activity (LDA). The aim of this trial is to evaluate the contribution of low-dose sequential kinetic activation (SKA) IL-4, IL-10, and anti-IL-1 antibodies (10 fg/mL) in patients affected by RA in maintaining LDA or remission obtained after biological therapy. METHOD: This is a randomized, open, active-controlled, prospective, Phase IV trial. Disease activity score (DAS28), clinical disease activity index, simplified disease activity index, erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein levels, global health assessment, and pain visual analog scale were evaluated at baseline visit and then every 3 months together with an assessment of side effects till 12 months. Thirty-nine RA patients were enrolled and randomized to continue disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) therapy or to receive a combination of SKA low-dose cytokines formulated in concentration of 10 fg/mL orally administered at a dose of 20 drops/d for 12 consecutive months. RESULTS: The rate of maintenance of LDA at 12 months was superior in the group treated with low-dose cytokines compared with patients treated with DMARDs, 66.7% and 42.1%, respectively; however, the difference between the groups was not statistically significant. No side effects were reported in both groups. CONCLUSION: This is the first study using a combination of three low-dose cytokines in RA, after data published on psoriasis. These data suggest that the use of a combination of low-dose SKA cytokines may be an opportunity to explore in the management of RA.

Differences Regarding Branded HA in Italy, Part 2: Data from Clinical Studies on Knee, Hip, Shoulder, Ankle, Temporomandibular Joint, Vertebral Facets, and Carpometacarpal Joint.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the current study is to collect scientific data on all branded hyaluronic acid (HA) products in Italy that are in use for intra-articular (IA) injection in osteoarthritis (OA) compared with that reported in the leaflet. METHODS: An extensive literature research was performed for all articles reporting data on the IA use of HA in OA. Selected studies were taken into consideration only if they are related to products based on HAs that are currently marketed in Italy with the specific joint indication for IA use in patients affected by OA. RESULTS: Sixty-two HA products are marketed in Italy: 30 products are indicated for the knee but only 8 were proved with some efficacy; 9 products were effective for the hip but only 6 had hip indication; 7 products proved to be effective for the shoulder but only 3 had the indication; 5 products proved effective for the ankle but only one had the indication; 6 products were effective for the temporomandibular joint but only 2 had the indication; only 2 proved effective for vertebral facet joints but only 1 had the indication; and 5 products proved effective for the carpometacarpal joint but only 2 had the indication. CONCLUSIONS: There are only a few products with some evidences, while the majority of products remain without proof. Clinicians and regulators should request postmarketing studies from pharmaceuticals to corroborate with that reported in the leaflet and to gather more data, allowing the clinicians to choose the adequate product for the patient.

Differences among Branded Hyaluronic Acids in Italy, Part 1: Data from In Vitro and Animal Studies and Instructions for Use.

BACKGROUND: The use of hyaluronic acid (HA) for intra-articular (IA) injection is widespread around the world for patients affected by osteoarthritis. AIM: The aim of this study is to identify scientific evidence from in vitro and in vivo studies supporting the use of IA HAs marketed in Italy. We also evaluated the accuracy of indications and contraindications reported in the leaflets of such HAs compared with the available scientific evidence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An extensive literature search was performed to identify all in vitro and in vivo model studies reporting on the effects of various HAs marketed in Italy for IA use. Data reported in the leaflets of different HA-based products for IA use were extracted and analyzed alongside evidence from in vitro and in vivo model studies. RESULTS: Nine in vitro studies and 11 studies on animal models were examined. Comparing results with what is reported in the leaflets of HAs marketed in Italy, it was observed that many branded formulations are introduced in the market without any reporting of basic scientific evidence. Only 12.82% and 17.95% of branded products had been shown to be effective with scientific evidence from in vitro and in vivo studies, respectively. The rationale of use of these products is based on their nature, as if a class effect existed such that all HAs would yield similar effects. CONCLUSIONS: Data on HAs deriving from in vitro and in vivo studies are scarce and relate to only a small percentage of products marketed in Italy. Many indications and contraindications are arbitrarily reported in Italian HA leaflets without the support of scientific evidence. Larger and brand-specific studies are necessary and should be reported in the leaflets to guide clinicians in making an appropriate choice regarding HA-based IA therapy.