Inflammation Is an Important Covariate for the Crosstalk of Sleep and the HPA Axis in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients have sleep problems, and inflammation influences sleep. We demonstrated that sleep quality improves during intensified treatment with methotrexate (MTX) or etanercept (ETA). Since the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis is involved in sleep regulation, this study investigated the interrelation between sleep parameters, inflammation as objectified by C-reactive protein (CRP), and serum cortisol and adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) levels. Thirty-one eligible patients (disease activity score, DAS28CRP ≥3.2) participated in a 16-week, open, prospective study of HPA axis outcomes. MTX was initiated in 15 patients (female-to-male ratio 9/6) and ETA in 16 patients (14/2). Clinical, laboratory (after polysomnography [PSG] between 8 and 9 a.m.), sleep (PSG), and HPA axis outcome parameters (after PSG between 8 and 9 a.m.) were recorded at baseline and week 16. Clinical characteristics of patients markedly improved throughout the study (e.g., DAS28CRP: p < 0.001; CRP: p < 0.001). Sleep efficiency and wake time after sleep onset markedly improved in the ETA group. Serum cortisol and ACTH did not change during observation. At baseline, serum cortisol levels were negatively correlated to sleep efficiency; this may depend on inflammation, because controlling for CRP eliminated this negative correlation. After ETA treatment, serum cortisol had a high positive correlation with total sleep time, sleep efficiency, and a negative correlation with wake time before and after sleep onset, which was not eliminated by controlling for CRP. In RA patients, the data indicate that inflammation is an important covariate for the crosstalk of sleep and the HPA axis.

Effects of treatment with etanercept versus methotrexate on sleep quality, fatigue and selected immune parameters in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare sleep quality, disease activity and patient-reported outcomes such as fatigue and immune parameters in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with etanercept (ETA) or methotrexate (MTX). METHODS: Of 36 patients (28-joint Disease Activity Score, DAS28CRP≥3.2) in this 16-week (w), open, prospective study, 19 (11 women) received MTX 12.5-17 mg/w, and 17 (14 women) received ETA 25 mg x 2/w, alone or in combination with MTX. Clinical (DAS28CRP, visual analogue scale), laboratory (C-reactive protein [CRP]), sleep (polysomnography), functional (Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory; Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI); 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), immunological (humoral/cellular) and neuroendocrine (hormonal) parameters were recorded at baseline (BL), w8 and w16. RESULTS: BL characteristics did not differ significantly between the ETA and MTX groups except disease duration: mean age (years): 48.6±8.8 vs. 49.4±16.6; mean disease duration (months): 19.6±46.3 vs. 81.2±79.2; and DAS28CRP: 4.4±0.9 vs. 4.4±1.7, respectively. DAS28CRP, SF-36, and HAQ-DI improved significantly in both groups from BL to w16 (p≤0.05). The DAS28CRP improvements at w16 (mean changes -1.8 in the ETA group, and -1.4 in MTX group), were not statistically significant from each other. The absolute values of sleep efficiency, total sleep time, and stage 2 sleep duration increased significantly in the ETA group, but no significant changes were reported in the MTX group. CONCLUSIONS: Both therapies improved disease activity, CRP, SF-36 and HAQ-DI, with faster, more pronounced changes in DAS28CRP in the ETA group, which alone had significantly improved sleep parameters.

Tigecycline in the Treatment of Patients with Necrotizing Skin and Soft Tissue Infections Due to Multiresistant Bacteria.

BACKGROUND: Necrotizing skin and soft tissue infections (NSTI) form a group of aggressive diseases that require radical debridement for infection control. Simultaneously, a high-dose broad spectrum antibiotic regimen needs to be initiated with control of septic complications in the intensive care setting. The aim of this work is to analyze the efficacy and safety of tigecycline in a subpopulation of hospitalized, severely ill surgical NSTI patients who were documented in a large multicenter non-interventional study on tigecycline use in routine clinical practice. METHODS: A total of 1,025 patients with severe infections including complicated skin and soft-tissue infections (cSSTI, n=163; 15,9%) were enrolled in a prospective multi-center non-interventional study. Patients were to receive an initial intravenous dose of 100 mg tigecycline, followed by 50 mg twice daily. Prospectively documented parameters included clinical findings, APACHE II score, microbiological and standard laboratory assessments, surgical measures, and clinical outcomes including adverse events. RESULTS: Of 163 patients were treated for cSSTI, with the largest subgroup being NSTI patients (n=50, 30.7% of all cSSTI, mean age 61 y, median APACHE II score 20). Forty-eight NSTI patients (96%) had at least one comorbidity. In 80% of patients, the treatment was started after previous antibiotic treatment had failed and in 34% resistant pathogens were isolated (28% methicillin resistant Staphyloccocus aureus [MRSA], 4% extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing bacteria, and 2% vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE). Tigecycline was administered as a single agent in 32 patients; 17 received combination regimens. Data from one patient were not reported. Rates of clinical cure or improvement with tigecycline treatment were 90.2%. Two patients (4%) had drug related adverse events (one thrombocytopenia and one fever/chills); 10 patients (20%) died. CONCLUSIONS: Tigecycline alone or in combination therapy was an effective and safe antibiotic treatment in critically ill and antimicrobially pre-treated patients with NSTI frequently caused by resistant pathogens.

Differential effects of venlafaxine in the treatment of major depressive disorder according to baseline severity.

In this meta-analysis, we compare the relative efficacy of venlafaxine to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in patients with major depressive disorder classified according to baseline disease severity. Data from 31 double-blind randomised clinical trials comparing venlafaxine and SSRIs (intent-to-treat n = 6,492) were pooled. For this secondary analysis, patients were stratified into groups based on baseline HAM-D(17) total score (>or=30, <30, >or=25, and <25). Remission rates (HAM-D(17) < 8) were analyzed for each subgroup using Fisher's exact test to compare treatment effects between venlafaxine and SSRIs; last observation carried forward (LOCF) and observed cases (OC) data were analyzed. The number needed to treat (NNT) to benefit was determined for each analysis. Statistically significant remission rate differences, favoring venlafaxine, were seen in LOCF and OC analyses for each subgroup. In patients with baseline HAM-D(17) < 25 (n = 3,928) the differences were (LOCF) 7.3 [P < 0.001; NNT = 14] and (OC) 6.2 [P = 0.003; NNT = 16], and in patients with baseline HAM-D(17) >or= 25 (n = 2,564) were (LOCF) 5.7 [P = 0.002; NNT = 17] and (OC) 6.7 [P = 0.009; NNT = 15]. In patients with baseline HAM-D(17) < 30 (n = 5,836) the differences were (LOCF) 6.4 [P < 0.001; NNT = 16] and (OC) 5.5 [P = 0.001; NNT = 18], and in patients with baseline HAM-D(17) >or= 30 (n = 656) were (LOCF) 8.9 [P = 0.015; NNT = 11] and (OC) 14.8 [P = 0.003; NNT = 7]. In conclusion, these analyses demonstrate that venlafaxine may be superior to SSRIs in achieving remission in both mild/moderate and severely depressed patients. The greater difference in remission rates among patients with baseline HAM-D(17) >or= 30 suggests a more pronounced clinical benefit that may be achieved with venlafaxine in severely depressed patients.