RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Articulaciones de la Mano , Osteoartritis , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Humanos , Grupos Control , Articulaciones de la Mano/fisiopatología , Osteoartritis/tratamiento farmacológico , Placebos/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Salud Global , Hidradenitis Supurativa , Humanos , Hidradenitis Supurativa/epidemiología , Hidradenitis Supurativa/diagnóstico , Prevalencia , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , AdultoRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Artritis Reumatoide , Glucocorticoides , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Antihipertensivos/farmacología , Artritis Reumatoide/tratamiento farmacológico , Presión Sanguínea , Glucocorticoides/farmacología , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Aumento de PesoRESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Artritis Reumatoide , Glucocorticoides , Humanos , Glucocorticoides/efectos adversos , Artritis Reumatoide/tratamiento farmacológico , Prednisona/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
Systematic reviews with meta-analyses are powerful instruments to synthesize research. If done correctly, they may constitute the highest level of evidence by combining several individual studies. As high-quality evidence is scarce in the field of complementary medicine, meta-analyses of randomized trials may shed new light on both efficacy and safety, but they must be properly conducted. In this commentary to a recently published paper we elaborate on methodological pitfalls in meta-analysis that every researcher should avoid to gain true high-quality evidence.
Asunto(s)
Metaanálisis como AsuntoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Ultrasound (US) examination of the entheses is increasingly used. However, little is known about US findings in the entheses in asymptomatic persons. The aim of this study was to investigate the appearance of US signs in the enthuses of the lower limb in asymptomatic subjects. METHODS: We recruited 64 subjects, eight women and eight men whose ages covered four decades, from 20 to 60 years. None had tendon or joint disease in the lower limbs. Participants were examined by a rheumatologist and blood samples were collected to rule out enthesis pathology. The enthesis of the dominant leg were examined with grey-scale and Doppler US to evaluate increased thickness, changed structure, enthesophytes/calcifications, erosions, and colour Doppler signal. RESULTS: Ultrasound examination of 320 entheses was made. At enthesis level, elementary lesions were seen at 73 (22.8%) sites, at subject-level 47 (73.4%) persons showed elementary lesions, in 27 (57%) only one enthesis was affected. Doppler activity was seen in four sites, three at the quadriceps insertion. Most common US elementary lesion was enthesophytes at the Achilles and quadriceps tendon insertion. A tendency towards more elementary lesions was seen in men, and a slight increase was seen with increasing age, however, not statistically significance. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that US can be used to diagnose/examine subjects in adulthood for pathological changes in the entheses; however, caution should be taken regarding enthesophytes of the quadriceps and Achilles tendon.
Asunto(s)
Fibrocartílago/diagnóstico por imagen , Tendones/diagnóstico por imagen , Ultrasonografía/métodos , Tendón Calcáneo , Adulto , Cartílago Articular/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Fibrocartílago/fisiología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Tendones/fisiología , Ultrasonografía Doppler , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
The subtype of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) influences the choice of treatment. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a non-invasive imaging tool, and a recent development of an angiographic version of OCT has extended the application of OCT to image the cutaneous microvasculature (so-called dynamic OCT, D-OCT). This study explores D-OCT's ability to differentiate the common BCC subtypes by microvascular and structural imaging. Eighty-one patients with 98 BCC lesions, consisting of three subtypes: 27 superficial BCC (sBCC), 55 nodular BCC (nBCC) and 16 infiltrative BCC (iBCC) were D-OCT scanned at three European dermatology centres. Blinded evaluations of microvascular and structural features were performed, followed by extensive statistical analysis of risk ratio (RR) and multiple correspondence analysis. nBCC lesions displayed most characteristic structural and vascular features. Serpiginous vessels, branching vessels, vessels creating a circumscribed figure and sharply demarcated hyporeflective ovoid structures in the dermis were all associated with a higher risk of the subtype being nBCC. The presence of highly present lines and dark peripheral borders at the margin of ovoid structures was negatively associated with iBCC. Lastly, the finding of hyporeflective ovoid structures protruding from epidermis correlated with sBCC. We identified various microvascular and structural D-OCT features that may aid non-invasive identification of BCC subtypes. This would allow clinicians to individualize and optimize BCC treatment as well as aid follow-up of non-surgical treatment.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Basocelular/diagnóstico por imagen , Carcinoma Basocelular/patología , Microcirculación , Neoplasias Cutáneas/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patología , Tomografía de Coherencia Óptica , Anciano , Biopsia , Diferenciación Celular , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , Humanos , Procesamiento de Imagen Asistido por Computador , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neovascularización Patológica , Variaciones Dependientes del Observador , Distribución Aleatoria , RiesgoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Weight loss is commonly recommended for gout, but the magnitude of the effect has not been evaluated in a systematic review. The aim of this systematic review was to determine benefits and harms associated with weight loss in overweight and obese patients with gout. METHODS: We searched six databases for longitudinal studies, reporting the effect of weight loss in overweight/obese gout patients. Risk of bias was assessed using the tool Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. RESULTS: From 3991 potentially eligible studies, 10 were included (including one randomised trial). Interventions included diet with/without physical activity, bariatric surgery, diuretics, metformin or no intervention. Mean weight losses ranged from 3 kg to 34 kg. Clinical heterogeneity in study characteristics precluded meta-analysis. The effect on serum uric acid (sUA) ranged from -168 to 30 µmol/L, and 0%-60% patients achieving sUA target (<360 µmol/L). Six out of eight studies (75%) showed beneficial effects on gout attacks. Two studies indicated dose-response relationship for sUA, achieving sUA target and gout attacks. At short term, temporary increased sUA and gout attacks tended to occur after bariatric surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence is in favour of weight loss for overweight/obese gout patients, with low, moderate and low quality of evidence for effects on sUA, achieving sUA target and gout attacks, respectively. At short term, unfavourable effects may occur. Since the current evidence consists of a few studies (mostly observational) of low methodological quality, there is an urgent need to initiate rigorous prospective studies (preferably randomised controlled trials). SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42016037937.
Asunto(s)
Gota/terapia , Obesidad/terapia , Sobrepeso/terapia , Pérdida de Peso , Cirugía Bariátrica/efectos adversos , Dietoterapia/efectos adversos , Diuréticos/efectos adversos , Terapia por Ejercicio/efectos adversos , Femenino , Gota/sangre , Gota/complicaciones , Humanos , Hipoglucemiantes/efectos adversos , Estudios Longitudinales , Masculino , Metformina/efectos adversos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Obesidad/sangre , Obesidad/complicaciones , Sobrepeso/sangre , Sobrepeso/complicaciones , Resultado del Tratamiento , Ácido Úrico/sangreRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Suprarrenal , Antirreumáticos , Artritis Reumatoide , Lupus Eritematoso Sistémico , Humanos , Insuficiencia Suprarrenal/inducido químicamente , Insuficiencia Suprarrenal/tratamiento farmacológico , Antirreumáticos/uso terapéutico , Artritis Reumatoide/tratamiento farmacológico , Glucocorticoides/efectos adversos , Lupus Eritematoso Sistémico/tratamiento farmacológico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Inflamación , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Humanos , Oportunidad Relativa , Enfermedad Crónica , Resultado del Tratamiento , Inflamación/tratamiento farmacológico , Pacientes Desistentes del Tratamiento , Estudios Epidemiológicos , Funciones de Verosimilitud , Proyectos de InvestigaciónRESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Densidad Ósea , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones , Enfermedades Reumáticas , Humanos , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/efectos adversos , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Masculino , Estudios Transversales , Persona de Mediana Edad , Densidad Ósea/efectos de los fármacos , Enfermedades Reumáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedades Reumáticas/complicaciones , Estudios Prospectivos , Anciano , Glucocorticoides/efectos adversos , Glucocorticoides/administración & dosificación , Cuello Femoral/diagnóstico por imagen , Vértebras Lumbares/efectos de los fármacos , Vértebras Lumbares/diagnóstico por imagenRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Dolor Crónico , Enfermedades Musculoesqueléticas , Enfermedades Reumáticas , Reumatología , Humanos , Dolor Crónico/terapia , Enfermedades Reumáticas/terapia , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de SaludRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Gota , Obesidad , Prueba de Estudio Conceptual , Pérdida de Peso , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Índice de Masa Corporal , Dieta Reductora , Fatiga/etiología , Gota/complicaciones , Gota/dietoterapia , Obesidad/complicaciones , Ácido Úrico/sangreRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Artritis Reumatoide , Densidad Ósea , Masculino , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Glucocorticoides/uso terapéutico , Estudios Transversales , Estudios de Cohortes , Artritis Reumatoide/tratamiento farmacológico , Artritis Reumatoide/complicaciones , Vértebras Lumbares/diagnóstico por imagen , Absorciometría de FotónRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Osteoartritis , Calidad de Vida , Adulto , Humanos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Osteoartritis/diagnóstico , DolorRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Musculoesqueléticas , Reumatología , Humanos , Enfermedades Musculoesqueléticas/terapia , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Ensayos Clínicos como AsuntoRESUMEN
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.