Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 11 de 11
Filtrar
1.
Lupus ; : 9612033241244879, 2024 Apr 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38587355

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: We aim to report on the feasibility of establishment of the first paediatric cohort as part of the longitudinal database of the Australian Lupus Registry and Biobank (ALRB) and to describe the enrolment data with a focus on clinical characteristics, serological data, treatment strategies and patient/parent-reported outcome measures. METHODS: All patients under the age of 18 years with a diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) attending the paediatric rheumatology service of a single, tertiary hospital were identified. Patients were enrolled in the ALRB if they met ≥4/11 of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1997 SLE classification criteria or the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) 2012 classification criteria. Enrolment data including demographics, clinical characteristics, serological profiles, disease activity and damage assessments were recorded. Peds-QL Rheumatology and General Modules were used to assess patient and parent-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were eligible for inclusion, with 26 patients (96%) consenting for enrolment. Twenty-five patients (92%) consented for biobanking. Twenty patients (77%) were female. The median age at enrolment was 16 years (interquartile range (IQR) 13.7, 17.4). The median disease duration from diagnosis was 3.2 years (IQR 1.4, 5.3). Sixteen patients (62%) had synovitis, 16 (62%) had cutaneous involvement, 4 (15%) had serositis, 17 (65%) had haematological involvement and 7 (27%) had renal involvement at enrolment. Nineteen patients (73%) were prescribed at least two disease-modifying anti-rheumatic medications (DMARDs). Hydroxychloroquine (n = 22, 85%) and mycophenolate mofetil (n = 9, 35%) were the most commonly prescribed DMARDs. The median SLEDAI-2K score was 2 (IQR 2, 4). Six patients (23%) had active disease (SLEDAI-2K ≥6) at enrolment. Three patients (11.5%) had reported damage using the SLICC/ACR Damage Index. Twenty-three children (88%) and eighteen parents (69%) completed the Paediatric Quality of Life Inventory. Quality of life scores reported across domains of physical, emotional, social and school functioning at enrolment were comparable to previously studied paediatric cohorts with SLE and other chronic diseases. CONCLUSION: We have established our centre as the first paediatric participating site of the ALRB, providing contemporary data on the clinical characteristics, serological profile and health-related quality of life outcomes of Australian children with SLE. Paediatric involvement with this national registry will provide a unique perspective for future clinical and scientific research. Collection of Australian-specific paediatric longitudinal data will also enable a broader understanding of SLE within a multicultural Australian population.

2.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 2: CD003129, 2024 02 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38334147

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common rheumatic disease in childhood. Methotrexate has broad immunomodulatory properties and is the most commonly used disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD). This is an update of a 2001 Cochrane review. It supports a living guideline for children and young people with JIA. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of methotrexate for children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis. SEARCH METHODS: The Australian JIA Living Guideline Working Group created a registry of all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of JIA by searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trials registries. The date of the most recent search of online databases was 1 February 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for RCTs that compared methotrexate with placebo, no treatment, or another DMARD (with or without concomitant therapies) in children and young people (aged up to 18 years) with JIA. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. The main comparison was methotrexate versus placebo. Our outcomes were treatment response, sustained clinically inactive disease, function, pain, participant global assessment of well-being, serious adverse events, and withdrawals due to adverse events. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We identified three new trials in this update, bringing the total number of included RCTs to five (575 participants). Three trials evaluated oral methotrexate versus placebo, one evaluated methotrexate plus intra-articular glucocorticoid (IAGC) therapy versus IAGC therapy alone, and one evaluated methotrexate versus leflunomide. Doses of methotrexate ranged from 5 mg/m2/week to 15 mg/m2/week in four trials, and participants in the methotrexate group of the remaining trial received 0.5 mg/kg/week. Trial size varied from 31 to 226 participants. The average age of participants ranged from four to 10 years. Most participants were females and most had nonsystemic JIA. The study that evaluated methotrexate plus IAGC therapy versus IAGC therapy alone recruited children and young people with the oligoarticular disease subtype of JIA. Two placebo-controlled trials and the trial of methotrexate versus leflunomide were adequately randomised and blinded, and likely not susceptible to important biases. One placebo-controlled trial may have been susceptible to selection bias due to lack of adequate reporting of randomisation methods. The trial investigating the addition of methotrexate to IAGC therapy was susceptible to performance and detection biases. Methotrexate versus placebo Methotrexate compared with placebo may increase the number of children and young people who achieve treatment response up to six months (absolute difference of 163 more per 1000 people; risk ratio (RR) 1.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21 to 2.31; I2 = 0%; 3 trials, 328 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, methotrexate compared with placebo may have little or no effect on pain as measured on an increasing scale of 0 to 100 (mean difference (MD) -1.10 points, 95% CI -9.09 to 6.88; 1 trial, 114 participants), improvement in participant global assessment of well-being (absolute difference of 92 more per 1000 people; RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.72; 1 trial, 176 participants), occurrence of serious adverse events (absolute difference of 5 fewer per 1000 people; RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.04 to 8.97; 3 trials, 328 participants), and withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 3.46, 95% CI 0.60 to 19.79; 3 trials, 328 participants) up to six months. We could not estimate the absolute difference for withdrawals due to adverse events because there were no withdrawals in the placebo group. All outcomes were reported within six months of randomisation. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to low for all outcomes due to indirectness (suboptimal dosing of methotrexate and diverse outcome measures) and imprecision (few participants and low event rates). No trials reported function or the number of participants with sustained clinically inactive disease. Serious adverse events included liver derangement, abdominal pain, and inadvertent overdose. Methotrexate plus intra-articular corticosteroid therapy versus intra-articular corticosteroid therapy alone Methotrexate plus IAGC therapy compared with IAGC therapy alone may have little or no effect on the probability of sustained clinically inactive disease or the rate of withdrawals due to adverse events up to 12 months in children and young people with the oligoarticular subtype of JIA (low-certainty evidence). We could not calculate the absolute difference in withdrawals due to adverse events because there were no withdrawals in the control group. We are uncertain if there is any difference between the interventions in the risk of severe adverse events, because none were reported. The study did not report treatment response, function, pain, or participant global assessment of well-being. Methotrexate versus an alternative disease-modifying antirheumatic drug Methotrexate compared with leflunomide may have little or no effect on the probability of treatment response or on function, participant global assessment of well-being, risk of serious adverse events, and rate of withdrawals due to adverse events up to four months. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes to low due to imprecision. The study did not report pain or sustained clinically inactive disease. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Oral methotrexate (5 mg/m2/week to 15 mg/m2/week) compared with placebo may increase the number of children and young people achieving treatment response but may have little or no effect on pain or participant global assessment of well-being. Oral methotrexate plus IAGC injections compared to IAGC injections alone may have little or no effect on the likelihood of sustained clinically inactive disease among children and young people with oligoarticular JIA. Similarly, methotrexate compared with leflunomide may have little or no effect on treatment response, function, and participant global assessment of well-being. Serious adverse events due to methotrexate appear to be rare. We will update this review as new evidence becomes available to inform the living guideline.


Asunto(s)
Antirreumáticos , Artritis Juvenil , Niño , Femenino , Humanos , Adolescente , Anciano , Preescolar , Masculino , Metotrexato/efectos adversos , Artritis Juvenil/tratamiento farmacológico , Artritis Juvenil/inducido químicamente , Leflunamida/efectos adversos , Australia , Antirreumáticos/efectos adversos , Glucocorticoides , Dolor/tratamiento farmacológico
4.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 10: CD013818, 2022 10 14.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36239193

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Uveitis is the most common extra-articular manifestation of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and a potentially sight-threatening condition characterized by intraocular inflammation. Current treatment for JIA-associated uveitis (JIA-U) is largely based on physician experience, observational evidence and consensus guidelines, resulting in considerable variations in practice.  OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors used for treatment of JIA-U. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; PubMed; Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS); ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We last searched the electronic databases on 3 February 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TNF inhibitors with placebo in participants with a diagnosis of JIA and uveitis who were aged 2 to 18 years old. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodology and graded the certainty of the body of evidence for seven outcomes using the GRADE classification. MAIN RESULTS: We included three RCTs with 134 participants. One study conducted in the USA randomized participants to etanercept or placebo (N = 12). Two studies, one conducted in the UK (N = 90) and one in France (N = 32), randomized participants to adalimumab or placebo. All studies were at low risk of bias. Initial pooled estimates suggested that TNF-inhibitors may result in little to no difference on treatment success defined as 0 to trace cells on Standardization of Uveitis Nomenclature (SUN)-grading; or two-step decrease in activity based on SUN grading (estimated risk ratio (RR) 0.66; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21 to 2.10; 2 studies; 43 participants; low-certainty evidence) or treatment failure defined as a two-step increase in activity based on SUN grading (RR 0.31; 95% CI 0.01 to 7.15; 1 study; 31 participants; low-certainty evidence). Further analysis using the individual trial definitions of treatment response and failure suggested a positive treatment effect of TNF inhibitors; a RR of treatment success of 2.60 (95% CI 1.30 to 5.20; 3 studies; 124 participants; low-certainty evidence), and RR of treatment failure of 0.23 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.50; 3 studies; 133 participants). Almost all the evidence was on adalimumab and the evidence on etanercept was very limited.  For secondary outcomes, one study suggests that adalimumab may have little to no effect on risk of recurrence after induction of remission at three months (RR 2.50, 95% CI 0.31 to 20.45; 90 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and visual acuity, but the evidence is very uncertain; mean difference in longitudinal logMAR score change over six months was -0.01 (95% CI -0.06 to 0.03) and -0.02 (95% CI -0.07 to 0.03) using the best and worst logMAR measurement, respectively (low-certainty evidence). Low-certainty evidence from one study suggested that adalimumab treatment results in reduction of topical steroid doses at six months (hazard ratio 3.58; 95% CI 1.24 to 10.32; 74 participants who took one or more topical steroid per day at baseline). Adverse events, including injection site reactions and infections, were more common in the TNF inhibitor group. Serious adverse events were uncommon. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab appears to increase the likelihood of treatment success and decrease the likelihood of treatment failure when compared with placebo. The evidence was less conclusive about a positive treatment effect with etanercept. Adverse events from JIA-U trials are in keeping with the known side effect profile of TNF inhibitors. Standard validated JIA-U outcome measures are required to homogenize assessment and to allow for comparison and analysis of multiple datasets.


Asunto(s)
Artritis Juvenil , Uveítis , Adalimumab/efectos adversos , Adolescente , Artritis Juvenil/complicaciones , Artritis Juvenil/tratamiento farmacológico , Niño , Preescolar , Etanercept/efectos adversos , Humanos , Inhibidores del Factor de Necrosis Tumoral/efectos adversos , Factor de Necrosis Tumoral alfa , Uveítis/tratamiento farmacológico , Uveítis/etiología
5.
Pediatr Rheumatol Online J ; 20(1): 52, 2022 Jul 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35870945

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) is the most common rheumatic inflammatory disease in childhood. Optimal management requires clinicians to be up to date with the rapidly evolving evidence base. 'Living' evidence-based clinical practice guidelines, which integrate new evidence as soon as it is available, are a novel method to enhance the translation of research into practice. To determine the most relevant questions that should be prioritised in national Australian JIA living guidelines, we invited Australian and New Zealand paediatric rheumatologists and other relevant health professionals to identify and rank their most important questions in order of priority. METHODS: All 47 members of the Australian Paediatric Rheumatology Group (APRG) were invited to participate in a modified Delphi study comprising two rounds. The first round identified demographic information of respondents, current attitudes to guideline use and invited submission of priority management questions. The second round asked respondents to rank 27 collated and refined questions identified in round one in order of priority. RESULTS: There were 29 (62%) and 28 (60%) responses to the first and second survey rounds respectively. About two thirds were rheumatologists or trainees (66, 68%), nearly half had more than 10 years of experience (45, 46%) and practice setting was largely hospital (79, 86%) and urban (86, 75%). Most respondents used clinical guidelines in their practice (72% sometimes, 24% often), most frequently American College of Rheumatology (ACR) (66%) and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) (59%) guidelines. Reported barriers to guideline use included that they are not up to date and access difficulties. Most respondents (83%) considered Australian guidelines were necessary and two-thirds indicated they would use them if integrated into practice software. The highest ranked topics were down-titration and discontinuation of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (ranked first), best outcome measures (second) and treatment targets in JIA (third). CONCLUSIONS: There is strong clinician support for the development of Australian living guidelines for JIA. Consensus was reached on the ten top-ranked priority questions. Our guidelines will develop evidence-based recommendations for these high priority questions that will be updated in real time as needed to facilitate rapid translation of evidence into clinical practice.


Asunto(s)
Artritis Juvenil , Reumatología , Artritis Juvenil/tratamiento farmacológico , Australia , Niño , Técnica Delfos , Humanos , Reumatólogos , Reumatología/métodos
9.
Pediatr Rheumatol Online J ; 17(1): 67, 2019 Oct 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31585539

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Biologic medications have dramatically enhanced the treatment of many chronic paediatric inflammatory conditions. Their high cost is a factor that prohibits their broader use. Cheaper generic versions, or biosimilars, are increasingly being used. Healthcare services are switching some patients over to biosimilars for economic reasons, known as 'non-medical switching'. Some patients unsuccessfully switch due to perceived decreases in efficacy or non-specific drug effects. The implications of failed switching include exhaustion of therapeutic options, unnecessary exposure to other medications, increased healthcare utilisation, worse patient outcomes and higher overall healthcare costs. Patient perceptions almost certainly play a role in these 'failed switches'. METHODS: A thematic analysis was performed to better understand patient and parent perceptions on non-medical biosimilar switching. The study was conducted in accordance with the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research recommendations. Patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis currently taking adalimumab were included. RESULTS: Nine families were interviewed just prior to a hospital trust-wide non-medical switch to an adalimumab biosimilar. Several common themes were identified. The most frequent concerns were regarding practical aspects of the switch including the medication administration device type; the colour of the medication and administration device; and whether the injections would sting more. The relative safety and efficacy of the biosimilar was raised although most families felt that there would be no significant difference. Anxieties about the switch were largely placated by reassurances from the medical team. CONCLUSIONS: We derived recommendations based on existing adult literature and the observations from our study to optimise the benefits from non-medical biosimilar switching.


Asunto(s)
Adalimumab/uso terapéutico , Antirreumáticos/uso terapéutico , Artritis Juvenil/tratamiento farmacológico , Biosimilares Farmacéuticos/uso terapéutico , Sustitución de Medicamentos , Adolescente , Niño , Femenino , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Masculino , Insuficiencia del Tratamiento
11.
BMC Nephrol ; 16: 125, 2015 Aug 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26231174

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine has emerged as an alternative mode of health care delivery over the last decade. To date, there is very limited published information in the field of telehealth and paediatric nephrology. The aim of this study was to review our experience with paediatric telenephrology in Queensland, Australia. METHODS: A retrospective audit of paediatric nephrology telehealth consultations to determine the nature of the telehealth activity, reasons for referral to telehealth, and to compare costs and potential savings of the telehealth service. RESULTS: During a ten-year period (2004 - 2013), 318 paediatric telenephrology consultations occurred for 168 patients (95 male) with the median age of 8 years (range 3 weeks to 24 years). Congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract (30 %), followed by nephrotic syndrome (16 %), kidney transplant (12 %), and urinary tract infection (9 %) were the most common diagnoses. The estimated cost savings associated with telehealth were $31,837 in 2013 (average saving of $505 per consultation). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that paediatric telenephrology is a viable and economic method for patient assessment and follow up. The benefits include improved access to paediatric nephrology services for patients and their families, educational opportunity for the regional medical teams, and a substantial cost saving for the health care system.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Renales/epidemiología , Trasplante de Riñón , Riñón/anomalías , Nefrología , Pediatría , Derivación y Consulta/estadística & datos numéricos , Telemedicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Distribución por Edad , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Masculino , Síndrome Nefrótico/epidemiología , Queensland/epidemiología , Derivación y Consulta/economía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Telemedicina/economía , Infecciones Urinarias/epidemiología , Anomalías Urogenitales/epidemiología , Adulto Joven
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...