Fractura vertebral osteoporótica en el adulto mayor / Osteoporotic vertebral fracture in the elderly

La fractura osteoporótica es una entidad clínica que afecta seriamente la calidad y expectativa de vida del paciente, agregándose un impacto socioeconómico elevado, superando incluso a los gastos de patologías como el infarto agudo de miocardio, accidente cerebrovascular y cáncer de mama, y cuya incidencia y prevalencia va en aumento a medida que la población mundial envejece. La gran mayoría de los casos cursan inadvertidos y sub diagnosticados, dejando a tres de cuatro pacientes, sin tratamiento y expuestos a nuevos eventos. El foco mundial en los países desarrollados como estrategia de enfrentamiento de esta patología endémica ha sido el de la prevención, vale decir medicina primaria. Sin embargo, una vez diagnosticada la fractura osteoporótica, no existe consenso en el tipo de tratamiento óptimo, así como sus plazos en estos pacientes. La mayoría de las guías internacionales y los trabajos publicados, presentan diferencias en el manejo de esta lesión.

The osteoporotic fracture is a clinical entity that seriously affects the quality and life expectancy of the patient, adding a high socioeconomic impact, even exceeding the expenses of pathologies such as acute myocardial stroke, vascular cerebral stroke and breast cancer, and whose incidence and prevalence is increasing as the world population ages. The vast majority of cases are non-diagnosed, leaving three of four patients with non treatment at all. The target in developed countries as a strategy to confront this endemic pathology has been prevention, or, primary medicine. However, once the osteoporotic fracture is diagnosed, there is no consensus on the type of optimal treatment, as well as its deadlines in these patients. The majority of international guidelines and published articles show differences in the management and treatment of this fracture.

Chondroitin sulfate efficacy versus celecoxib on knee osteoarthritis structural changes using magnetic resonance imaging: a 2-year multicentre exploratory study.

BACKGROUND: In osteoarthritis (OA) treatment, although chondroitin sulfate (CS) was found in a number of studies using radiography to have a structure-modifying effect, to date CS use is still under debate. A clinical study using quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (qMRI) is therefore of the utmost importance. Here we report data from a 24-month, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled, comparative exploratory study of knee OA. The primary endpoint was to determine the effect of CS 1200 mg/day versus celecoxib 200 mg/day on cartilage volume loss (CVL) in the lateral compartment over time as measured by qMRI. Secondary endpoints included assessment of the OA structural changes and signs and symptoms of OA. METHODS: qMRI was performed at baseline and at 12 and 24 months. CVL, bone marrow lesion size, and synovial thickness were evaluated using qMRI. The primary statistical analysis was carried out on the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population (n = 138) using chi-squared, Fisher's exact, Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney, and Student's t tests and analysis of covariance. Analyses were also conducted on the according-to-protocol (ATP; n = 120) population. RESULTS: In the adjusted mITT analysis, compared with celecoxib treatment, patients treated with CS had a significant reduced CVL at 24 months in the medial compartment (celecoxib -8.1 % ± 4.2, CS -6.3 % ± 3.2; p = 0.018) and medial condyle (-7.7 % ± 4.7, -5.5 % ± 3.9; p = 0.008); no significant effect was seen in the lateral compartment. In the ATP population, CS reduced CVL in the medial compartment at 12 months (celecoxib -5.6 % ± 3.0, CS -4.5 % ± 2.6; p = 0.049) and 24 months (celecoxib -8.4 % ± 4.2, CS -6.6 % ± 3.3; p = 0.021), and in the medial condyle at 24 months (celocoxib -8.1 % ± 4.7, CS -5.7 % ± 4.0; p = 0.010). A trend towards a statistically reduced synovial thickness (celecoxib +17.96 ± 33.73 mm, CS -0.66 ± 22.72 mm; p = 0.076) in the medial suprapatellar bursa was observed in CS patients. Both groups experienced a marked reduction in the incidence of patients with joint swelling/effusion and in symptoms over time. Data showed similar good safety profiles including cardiovascular adverse events for both drugs. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated, for the first time in a 2-year randomised controlled trial using qMRI, the superiority of CS over celecoxib at reducing CVL in knee OA patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01354145 . Registered 13 May 2011.

Prediction of remission and low disease activity in disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug-refractory patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with golimumab.

OBJECTIVE: To create a tool to predict probability of remission and low disease activity (LDA) in patients with RA being considered for anti-TNF treatment in clinical practice. METHODS: We analysed data from GO-MORE, an open-label, multinational, prospective study in biologic-naïve patients with active RA (DAS28-ESR ⩾3.2) despite DMARD therapy. Patients received 50 mg s.c. golimumab (GLM) once monthly for 6 months. In secondary analyses, regression models were used to determine the best set of baseline factors to predict remission (DAS28-ESR <2.6) at month 6 and LDA (DAS28-ESR ⩽3.2) at month 1. RESULTS: In 3280 efficacy-evaluable patients, of 12 factors included in initial regression models predicting remission or LDA, six were retained in final multivariable models. Greater likelihood of LDA and remission was associated with being male; younger age; lower HAQ, ESR (or CRP) and tender joint count (or swollen joint count) scores; and absence of comorbidities. In models predicting 1-, 3- and 6-month LDA or remission, area under the receiver operating curve was 0.648-0.809 (R(2) = 0.0397-0.1078). The models also predicted 6-month HAQ and EuroQoL-5-dimension scores. A series of matrices were developed to easily show predicted rates of remission and LDA. CONCLUSION: A matrix tool was developed to show predicted GLM treatment outcomes in patients with RA, based on a combination of six baseline characteristics. The tool could help provide practical guidance in selection of candidates for anti-TNF therapy.

Effect of interleukin-6 receptor blockade on surrogates of vascular risk in rheumatoid arthritis: MEASURE, a randomised, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVES: The interleukin-6 receptor (IL-6R) blocker tocilizumab (TCZ) reduces inflammatory disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) but elevates lipid concentrations in some patients. We aimed to characterise the impact of IL-6R inhibition on established and novel risk factors in active RA. METHODS: Randomised, multicentre, two-part, phase III trial (24-week double-blind, 80-week open-label), MEASURE, evaluated lipid and lipoprotein levels, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) particle composition, markers of coagulation, thrombosis and vascular function by pulse wave velocity (PWV) in 132 patients with RA who received TCZ or placebo. RESULTS: Median total-cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) and triglyceride levels increased in TCZ versus placebo recipients by week 12 (12.6% vs 1.7%, 28.1% vs 2.2%, 10.6% vs -1.9%, respectively; all p<0.01). There were no significant differences in mean small LDL, mean oxidised LDL or total HDL-C concentrations. However, HDL-associated serum amyloid A content decreased in TCZ recipients. TCZ also induced reductions (>30%) in secretory phospholipase A2-IIA, lipoprotein(a), fibrinogen and D-dimers and elevation of paraoxonase (all p<0.0001 vs placebo). The ApoB/ApoA1 ratio remained stable over time in both groups. PWV decreases were greater with placebo than TCZ at 12 weeks (adjusted mean difference 0.79 m/s (95% CI 0.22 to 1.35; p=0.0067)). CONCLUSIONS: These data provide the first detailed evidence for the modulation of lipoprotein particles and other surrogates of vascular risk with IL-6R inhibition. When compared with placebo, TCZ induced elevations in LDL-C but altered HDL particles towards an anti-inflammatory composition and favourably modified most, but not all, measured vascular risk surrogates. The net effect of such changes for cardiovascular risk requires determination.

The presence of meniscal lesions is a strong predictor of neuropathic pain in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Pain in osteoarthritis (OA) has been classically attributed to joint structural damage. Disparity between the degree of radiographic structural damage and the severity of symptoms implies that factors other than the joint pathology itself contribute to the pain. Peripheral and central sensitization have been suggested as two of the underlying mechanisms that contribute to pain in OA. The aim of this study was to explore in symptomatic knee OA patients, the structural changes assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) that could be used as markers of neuropathic pain (NP). METHODS: This cross-sectional observational pilot study included 50 knee OA patients with moderate to severe pain (VAS ≥40) in the target knee. The presence of NP was determined based on the PainDETECT questionnaire. Among the 50 patients included, 25 had PainDETECT score ≤12 (unlikely NP), 9 had PainDETECT score between 13 and 18 (uncertain NP) and 16 had PainDETECT score ≥19 (likely NP). WOMAC, PainDETECT, and VAS pain scores as well as knee MRI were assessed. RESULTS: Data showed no significant difference in demographic characteristics between the three groups. However, a positive and statistically significant association was found between the WOMAC pain (P <0.001), function (P <0.001), stiffness (P = 0.007) and total (P <0.001) scores as well as higher VAS pain score (P = 0.023), and PainDETECT scores. Although no difference was found in the cartilage volume between groups, the presence of meniscal extrusion in both medial (P = 0.006) and lateral (P = 0.023) compartments, and presence of meniscal tears in the lateral compartment (P = 0.011), were significantly associated with increasing PainDETECT score. Moreover, the presence of bone marrow lesions in the lateral plateau and the extent of the synovial membrane thickness in the lateral recess were associated with increasing PainDETECT scores (P = 0.032, P = 0.027, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, meniscal lesions, particularly extrusion, were found to be among the strongest risk factors for NP in knee OA patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01733277. Registered 16 November 2012.

Brodalumab, an anti-IL17RA monoclonal antibody, in psoriatic arthritis.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the efficacy and safety of brodalumab, a human monoclonal antibody against interleukin-17 receptor A (IL17RA), in a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study involving patients with psoriatic arthritis. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with active psoriatic arthritis to receive brodalumab (140 or 280 mg subcutaneously) or placebo on day 1 and at weeks 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10. At week 12, patients who had not discontinued their participation in the study were offered open-label brodalumab (280 mg) every 2 weeks. The primary end point was 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR 20) at week 12. RESULTS: Of the 168 patients who underwent randomization (57 in the brodalumab 140-mg group, 56 in the brodalumab 280-mg group, and 55 in the placebo group), 159 completed the double-blind phase and 134 completed 40 weeks of the open-label extension. At week 12, the brodalumab 140-mg and 280-mg groups had higher rates of ACR 20 than the placebo group (37% [P=0.03] and 39% [P=0.02], respectively, vs. 18%); they also had higher rates of 50% improvement (ACR 50) (14% [P=0.05] and 14% [P=0.05] vs. 4%). Rates of 70% improvement were not significantly higher in the brodalumab groups. Similar degrees of improvement were noted among patients who had received previous biologic therapy and those who had not received such therapy. At week 24, ACR 20 response rates in the brodalumab 140-mg and 280-mg groups were 51% and 64%, respectively, as compared with 44% among patients who switched from placebo to open-label brodalumab; responses were sustained through week 52. At week 12, serious adverse events had occurred in 3% of patients in the brodalumab groups and in 2% of those in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Brodalumab significantly improved response rates among patients with psoriatic arthritis. Larger studies of longer duration are necessary to assess adverse events. (Funded by Amgen; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01516957 .).

Patient and physician expectations of add-on treatment with golimumab for rheumatoid arthritis: relationships between expectations and clinical and quality of life outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management involves improving clinical outcomes and quality of life (QOL). Golimumab is used as add-on therapy for patients who have failed disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). This GO-MORE subanalysis investigated relationships between patient and physician expectations and outcomes. METHODS: GO-MORE was an open-label, multinational, prospective study in biologic agent-naive patients with active RA despite DMARD treatment. Patients received 50 mg subcutaneous golimumab monthly for 6 months. At baseline and month 3, patients rated treatment expectations for the following 3 months using 5-point scales (where 1 = good and 5 = poor). Outcomes were compared among expectation tertiles: most positive, intermediate, and least positive. At baseline and month 3, physicians predicted patient disease state 3 months later. RESULTS: At baseline, 3,280 efficacy-evaluable patients with moderate (21.3%) or high (78.7%) disease activity had mean ± SD disease duration of 7.6 ± 7.9 years, mean ± SD Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI) score of 1.44 ± 0.67, and mean ± SD EuroQol 5-domain (EQ-5D) score of 0.42 ± 0.33. Patients reported high treatment expectations (mean 1.43); 95.9% expected golimumab to be better than current treatment. Patients with fewer DMARD failures, higher disease activity, shorter disease duration, younger age, and female sex reported higher expectations (P < 0.05 for all). After 6 months, patients with the most positive expectations had higher remission rates (P < 0.0001) and greater HAQ DI (P < 0.0001) and EQ-5D (P < 0.0001) score improvements. At baseline, physicians expected 29.6% and 59.2% of patients to attain remission and low disease activity, respectively, after 3 months. CONCLUSION: Patients had high expectations for golimumab treatment. Patients with more positive expectations had greater remission rates, improvements in function, and QOL.

Efficacy and safety of golimumab as add-on therapy to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: results of the GO-MORE study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous golimumab as add-on therapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) despite disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment. To evaluate an intravenous plus subcutaneous (IV+SC) golimumab strategy in patients who had not attained remission. METHODS: GO-MORE was an open-label, multinational, prospective study in patients with active RA in typical clinical practice settings. In part 1, patients received add-on monthly 50-mg subcutaneous golimumab for 6 months. The percentage of patients with good/moderate European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28)-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) response was compared in patient subgroups with various concurrent or previous DMARD treatments. In part 2, patients with EULAR responses but not remission were randomly assigned to receive IV+SC or subcutaneous golimumab to month 12; DAS28-ESR remission was measured. RESULTS: 3366 patients were enrolled. At baseline of part 1, 3280 efficacy-evaluable patients had mean disease duration of 7.6 years and mean DAS28-ESR of 5.97 (SD=1.095). At month 6, 82.1% achieved good/moderate EULAR responses and 23.9% attained remission. When EULAR responses were analysed by the number of previously failed DMARD or the concomitant methotrexate dose, DMARD type, or corticosteroid use, no statistically significant differences were observed. Part 2 patients (N=490) who received IV+SC or subcutaneous golimumab achieved similar remission rates (∼25%). Adverse events were consistent with previous reports of golimumab and other tumour necrosis antagonists in this population. CONCLUSIONS: Add-on monthly subcutaneous golimumab resulted in good/moderate EULAR response in most patients; 25% achieved remission after 6 more months of golimumab, but an IV+SC regimen provided no additional efficacy over the subcutaneous regimen.

Total Knee Replacement as a Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome: Predictors Derived from a 4-Year Long-Term Observation following a Randomized Clinical Trial Using Chondroitin Sulfate.

OBJECTIVE: To predict, using clinical and qMRI data, the incidence of total knee replacement (TKR) during the long-term follow-up of knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients who formerly received chondroitin sulfate (CS) or placebo treatment. DESIGN: A post hoc intention-to-treat analysis to evaluate the incidence of TKR was done on knee OA patients who had participated in a 12-month trial evaluating the impact of CS (800 mg/d) versus placebo for 6 months, followed by a 6-month open-phase in which all patients received CS. Additionally, the clinical and qMRI predictors of TKR were determined. RESULTS: Thirteen TKRs were performed in the population after a 4-year follow-up. More TKRs were performed in the placebo group than in the CS group (69% vs. 31%, P = 0.150, logistic regression). The statistically significant predictors of TKRs were, at baseline, higher WOMAC pain and function scores, presence of bone marrow lesions (BMLs), and higher C-reactive protein levels. Loss of medial cartilage volume and increase in WOMAC pain and function at one-year were also predictors of TKR. Multivariate analyses revealed that baseline presence of BML and higher WOMAC pain score were independent predictors. Time to occurrence of the TKR also favored the CS group versus placebo (log-rank, P = 0.094). CONCLUSION: Symptoms such as knee pain and function, presence of BML, and cartilage volume loss predict the long-term occurrence of a "hard" outcome such as TKR.

Efficacy and safety of the human anti-IL-1ß monoclonal antibody canakinumab in rheumatoid arthritis: results of a 12-week, Phase II, dose-finding study.

BACKGROUND: Canakinumab is a fully human anti-interleukin IL-1beta monoclonal antibody, being investigated for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This multicenter, phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, dose-finding study investigated the efficacy and safety of canakinumab in patients with active RA despite ongoing therapy at stable doses of methotrexate. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive one of four regimens, in addition to methotrexate, for 12 weeks: canakinumab 150 mg subcutaneously (SC) every 4 weeks (q4wk), canakinumab 300 mg SC (2 injections of 150 mg SC) every 2 weeks, a 600 mg intravenous loading dose of canakinumab followed by 300 mg SC every 2 weeks', or placebo SC every 2 weeks. RESULTS: Among 274 patients with evaluable efficacy data, the percentage of responders according to American College of Rheumatology 50 criteria (the primary endpoint, based on a 28-joint count) was significantly higher with canakinumab 150 mg SC q4wk than with placebo (26.5% vs. 11.4%, respectively; p = 0.028). Compared to placebo, this dosage of canakinumab was also associated with significantly more favorable responses at week 12 with respect to secondary endpoints including the Disease Activity Score 28, scores on the Health Assessment Questionnaire and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue, swollen 28-joint count, and patient's and physician's global assessments of disease activity. No safety concerns were raised with canakinumab therapy, particularly with regard to infections. Few injection-site reactions occurred. CONCLUSION: The addition of canakinumab 150 mg SC q4wk improves therapeutic responses among patients who have active RA despite stable treatment with methotrexate. TRIAL REGISTRATION: (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00784628).

Chondroitin sulphate reduces both cartilage volume loss and bone marrow lesions in knee osteoarthritis patients starting as early as 6 months after initiation of therapy: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study using MRI.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of chondroitin sulphate (CS) treatment on cartilage volume loss, subchondral bone marrow lesions (BML), synovitis and disease symptoms in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: In this pilot multicentre, randomised, double-blind, controlled trial in primary knee OA, 69 patients with clinical signs of synovitis were randomised to receive CS 800 mg or placebo once daily for 6 months followed by an open-label phase of 6 months in which patients in both groups received CS 800 mg once daily. Cartilage volume and BML were assessed by MRI at baseline and at 6 and 12 months; synovial membrane thickness was assessed at baseline and at 6 months. RESULTS: The CS group showed significantly less cartilage volume loss than the placebo group as early as 6 months for the global knee (p=0.030), lateral compartment (p=0.015) and tibial plateaus (p=0.002), with significance persisting at 12 months. Significantly lower BML scores were found for the CS group at 12 months in the lateral compartment (p=0.035) and the lateral femoral condyle (p=0.044). Disease symptoms were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: CS treatment significantly reduced the cartilage volume loss in knee OA starting at 6 months of treatment, and BML at 12 months. These findings suggest a joint structure protective effect of CS and provide new in vivo information on its mode of action in knee OA.

Mycophenolate mofetil in the treatment of adults with advanced rheumatoid arthritis: three 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo- or ciclosporin-controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Mycophenolate mofetil is an immunosuppressive agent approved for the prophylaxis of renal, cardiac and hepatic transplant rejection. With its proven immunosuppressive effects and favourable toxicity profile, mycophenolate mofetil was postulated as a potential candidate for treating rheumatoid arthritis. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of mycophenolate mofetil in the treatment of adults with advanced refractory rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: The effectiveness of mycophenolate mofetil (1 g twice daily) in the treatment of advanced refractory rheumatoid arthritis was assessed in three 24-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trials (two placebo-controlled [n = 229 and n = 214] and one with ciclosporin 2.5-4 mg/kg/day as a comparator [n = 842]). Patients had American Rheumatism Association functional class II or III disease, a mean disease duration of 9.8-13 years, and had failed treatment with a median of three to four disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Overall, 959/1262 (76%) of patients in the main analysis group were female and 1189/1262 (94%) were Caucasian. RESULTS: In the placebo-controlled trials, the American College of Rheumatology 20% responder index rate did not differ significantly between mycophenolate mofetil and placebo (19.7% [29/147] vs 13.0% [9/69] and 15.8% [22/139] vs 10.1% [7/69]; p > 0.05 for both studies). Consequently, the active-comparator trial was stopped prematurely before completion and efficacy analyses were not performed. Treatment-emergent adverse events were experienced by 51.6% (371/719), 73.1% (304/416) and 36.1% (53/147) of patients receiving mycophenolate mofetil, ciclosporin and placebo, respectively. Hypertension, increased serum creatinine, muscle cramps, hirsutism and hypertrichosis were more than twice as common with ciclosporin as with mycophenolate mofetil. In all three trials, the incidence of serious adverse events with mycophenolate mofetil was 12.1% (compared with 11.3% and 7.5% for ciclosporin and placebo, respectively). CONCLUSION: Mycophenolate mofetil did not achieve a significant difference from placebo in terms of disease improvement in patients with refractory rheumatoid arthritis. A descriptive analysis of adverse events suggests mycophenolate mofetil was generally as well tolerated as ciclosporin in this patient population.

Buprenorphine transdermal system for opioid therapy in patients with chronic low back pain.

OBJECTIVE: The present randomized, double-blinded, crossover study compared the efficacy and safety of a seven-day buprenorphine transdermal system (BTDS) and placebo in patients with low back pain of moderate or greater severity for at least six weeks. METHODS: Prestudy analgesics were discontinued the evening before random assignment to 5 microg/h BTDS or placebo, with acetaminophen 300 mg/codeine 30 mg, one to two tablets every 4 h to 6 h as needed, for rescue analgesia. The dose was titrated to effect weekly, if tolerated, to 10 microg/h and 20 microg/h BTDS. Each treatment phase was four weeks. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients (28 men, 25 women, mean [+/- SD] age 54.5+/-12.7 years) were evaluable for efficacy (completed two weeks or more in each phase). Baseline pain was 62.1+/-15.5 mm (100 mm visual analogue scale) and 2.5+/-0.6 (five-point ordinal scale). BTDS resulted in lower mean daily pain scores than in the placebo group (37.6+/-20.7 mm versus 43.6+/-21.2 mm on a visual analogue scale, P=0.0487; and 1.7+/-0.6 versus 2.0+/-0.7 on the ordinal scale, P=0.0358). Most patients titrated to the highest dose of BTDS (59% 20 microg/h, 31% 10 microg/h and 10% 5 microg/h). There were improvements from baseline in pain and disability (Pain Disability Index), Pain and Sleep (visual analogue scale), Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale and Short-Form 36 Health Survey scores for both BTDS and placebo groups, without significant differences between treatments. While there were more opioid-related side effects with BTDS treatment than with placebo, there were no serious adverse events. A total of 82% of patients chose to continue BTDS in a long-term open-label evaluation, in whom improvements in pain intensity, functionality and quality of life were sustained for up to six months without analgesic tolerance. CONCLUSION: BTDS (5 microg/h to 20 microg/h) represents a new treatment option for initial opioid therapy in patients with chronic low back pain.

An open-label pilot study evaluating by magnetic resonance imaging the potential for a disease-modifying effect of celecoxib compared to a modelized historical control cohort in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate by quantitative magnetic resonance imaging the effect of celecoxib 200 mg daily on cartilage volume loss over 12 months in knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: The primary outcome of this study was to evaluate cartilage volume loss in the medial compartment of the knee (femoral condyle and tibial plateau) assessed by quantitative magnetic resonance imaging on subjects receiving continuous treatment with celecoxib 200 mg daily for 12 months compared with a modelized historical control cohort, as expressed by the percentage loss from baseline. Safety of the medication was also assessed. Comparison of the observed volume loss to the expected loss was evaluated by a multivariate linear regression model based on a historical cohort. RESULTS: For the primary outcome, the 95% confidence intervals for the mean observed celecoxib cohort joint medial compartment cartilage volume loss (6.81% [6.01; 7.60]) and mean predicted loss (modelized historical cohort) (5.65% [5.10; 6.19]) overlap, indicating no significant difference and hence no effect of celecoxib on the medial compartment cartilage volume loss. Similar findings were demonstrated for the lateral compartment cartilage loss. The safety data reported several minor adverse events similar to those typically seen in a 1-year clinical trial. CONCLUSIONS: Although celecoxib was demonstrated to be safe for knee osteoarthritis at a 200 mg daily dose, it did not provide a protective effect on knee cartilage loss. Cohort modelization is an efficient and unbiased way to provide a comparator group for the assessment of novel treatments when classic head-to-head randomized controlled trials are not feasible.

The C-type lectin surface receptor DCIR acts as a new attachment factor for HIV-1 in dendritic cells and contributes to trans- and cis-infection pathways.

The dynamic interplay between dendritic cells (DCs) and human immunodeficiency virus type-1 (HIV-1) is thought to result in viral dissemination and evasion of antiviral immunity. Although initial observations suggested that the C-type lectin receptor (CLR) DC-SIGN was responsible for the trans-infection function of the virus, subsequent studies demonstrated that trans-infection of CD4(+) T cells with HIV-1 can also occur through DC-SIGN-independent mechanisms. We demonstrate that a cell surface molecule designated DCIR (for DC immunoreceptor), a member of a recently described family of DC-expressing CLRs, can participate in the capture of HIV-1 and promote infection in trans and in cis of autologous CD4(+) T cells from human immature monocyte-derived DCs. The contribution of DCIR to these processes was revealed using DCIR-specific siRNAs and a polyclonal antibody specific for the carbohydrate recognition domain of DCIR. Data from transfection experiments indicated that DCIR acts as a ligand for HIV-1 and is involved in events leading to productive virus infection. Finally, we show that the neck domain of DCIR is important for the DCIR-mediated effect on virus binding and infection. These results point to a possible role for DCIR in HIV-1 pathogenesis by supporting the productive infection of DCs and promoting virus propagation.

Effect of interleukin-6 receptor inhibition with tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (OPTION study): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin 6 is involved in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis via its broad effects on immune and inflammatory responses. Our aim was to assess the therapeutic effects of blocking interleukin 6 by inhibition of the interleukin-6 receptor with tocilizumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel group phase III study, 623 patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis were randomly assigned with an interactive voice response system, stratified by site with a randomisation list provided by the study sponsor, to receive tocilizumab 8 mg/kg (n=205), tocilizumab 4 mg/kg (214), or placebo (204) intravenously every 4 weeks, with methotrexate at stable pre-study doses (10-25 mg/week). Rescue therapy with tocilizumab 8 mg/kg was offered at week 16 to patients with less than 20% improvement in both swollen and tender joint counts. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with 20% improvement in signs and symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis according to American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20 response) at week 24. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00106548. FINDINGS: The intention-to-treat analysis population consisted of 622 patients: one patient in the 4 mg/kg group did not receive study treatment and was thus excluded. At 24 weeks, ACR20 responses were seen in more patients receiving tocilizumab than in those receiving placebo (120 [59%] patients in the 8 mg/kg group, 102 [48%] in the 4 mg/kg group, 54 [26%] in the placebo group; odds ratio 4.0 [95% CI 2.6-6.1], p<0.0001 for 8 mg/kg vs placebo; and 2.6 [1.7-3.9], p<0.0001 for 4 mg/kg vs placebo). More people receiving tocilizumab than those receiving placebo had at least one adverse event (143 [69%] in the 8 mg/kg group; 151 [71%] in the 4 mg/kg group; 129 [63%] in the placebo group). The most common serious adverse events were serious infections or infestations, reported by six patients in the 8 mg/kg group, three in the 4 mg/kg group, and two in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Tocilizumab could be an effective therapeutic approach in patients with moderate to severe active rheumatoid arthritis. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche, Chugai Pharmaceutical.

Adalimumab significantly reduces both spinal and sacroiliac joint inflammation in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of adalimumab versus placebo in reducing spinal and sacroiliac (SI) joint inflammation, by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: This was a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients (n = 82) received 40 mg adalimumab or placebo every other week during an initial 24-week double-blind period. MRIs of both the spine and SI joints were obtained at baseline, week 12, and week 52. Spinal and SI joint inflammation were measured using the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) MRI index. RESULTS: The spine SPARCC score in placebo-treated patients increased by a mean of 9.4% from baseline, compared with a mean decrease of 53.6% in adalimumab-treated patients (P < 0.001); the SI joint SPARCC score decreased by a mean of 12.7% from baseline in placebo-treated patients and by 52.9% in adalimumab-treated patients (P = 0.017). The response in adalimumab-treated patients was maintained at week 52. Placebo-treated patients were switched to open-label adalimumab treatment at week 24 and experienced similar reductions in spinal and SI joint inflammation by week 52. Similar large reductions in the spine and SI joint SPARCC scores were noted, even in patients who failed to meet the ASsessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis (International Working Group) criteria (nonresponders) at 12 weeks. In adalimumab-treated patients, a reduced C-reactive protein concentration at week 12 was significantly associated with improvement in the spine SPARCC score (P = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Adalimumab significantly reduced both spinal and SI joint inflammation in patients with active AS after 12 weeks of treatment, and these improvements were maintained for up to 52 weeks.

A comparison of the analgesic efficacy of Tramadol Contramid OAD versus placebo in patients with pain due to osteoarthritis.

One thousand twenty-eight (1,028) patients with pain due to osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee were enrolled in this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel study designed to assess the analgesic efficacy and safety of Tramadol Contramid OAD compared to placebo. An open-label phase was followed by a double-blind phase, in which a total of 646 patients were randomized to double-blind treatment with placebo or Tramadol Contramid OAD. Patients were titrated to their optimal dose (200mg or 300 mg), which was maintained for 12 weeks. An absolute mean reduction of 3.0+/-2.1 on a Pain Intensity Numerical Rating Scale (PI-NRS) was noted in the Tramadol Contramid OAD treatment group. The difference between active and placebo groups regarding this absolute mean reduction was statistically significant (P<0.001) throughout the study. The responder analysis demonstrated that a significantly greater percentage of patients in the active treatment arm achieved a reduction of >or=1 and >or=2 points on the PI-NRS score by the end of the study (P=0.035). A significantly greater percentage of respondents in the Tramadol Contramid OAD group indicated improvement on both the Patient and Physician Global Impressions of Change (P=0.0002). Both the 200mg and 300 mg doses contributed to the overall superiority of Tramadol Contramid OAD. The most frequent adverse events were consistent with the known side effects of tramadol and were generally mild to moderate in intensity. These results confirm that Tramadol Contramid OAD given once daily is an efficacious and safe treatment for pain due to OA.

A randomized, double-blind, 8-week crossover study of once-daily controlled-release tramadol versus immediate-release tramadol taken as needed for chronic noncancer pain.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of controlled-release (CR) tramadol and immediate-release (IR) tramadol in patients with moderate or greater intensity chronic noncancer pain. METHODS: A total of 122 patients underwent washout from all opioids 2 to 7 days before randomization to 1 of 2 groups: active CR tramadol 200 mg every morning plus placebo IR tramadol 50 mg every 4 to 6 hours PRN rescue, or placebo CR tramadol 200 mg every morning plus active IR tramadol 50 mg every 4 to 6 hours PRN rescue. After 2 weeks, the doses were increased to CR tramadol 400 mg or placebo and IR tramadol 100 mg every 4 to 6 hours PRN or placebo, as rescue. After 4 weeks in the first phase, patients crossed over to the alternative treatment for another 4 weeks. Pain intensity (100-mm visual analog scale [VAS] and 5-point ordinal scales) was assessed twice daily in diaries. Pain intensity, Pain and Disability Index (PDI; 0-10 ordinal scale), Pain and Sleep Questionnaire (100-mm VAS), and analgesic effectiveness (7-point ordinal scale) were assessed at biweekly clinic visits. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients (35 men, 30 women) completed the study. Mean (SD) age was 56.5 (12.7) years; mean (SD) weight was 82.0 (18.5) kg. Daily diary pain intensity (mean [SD]) was significantly lower in the CR tramadol group than in the IR tramadol group in the last 2 weeks of each phase (completers: VAS, 29.9 [20.5] vs 36.2 [20.4] mm, P < 0.001; ordinal scale, 1.41 [0.7] vs 1.64 [0.6], P < 0.001; intent-to-treat [ITT] population: VAS, 32.5 [22.9] vs 38.6 [21.2] mm, P < 0.003; ordinal scale, 1.50 [0.8] vs 1.72 [0.7], P < 0.002). The overall pain intensity scores from the daily diary were also significantly better with CR tramadol for both the completers and ITT. Similar results were obtained on the biweekly VAS pain intensity questionnaire. No differences were found between treatments in total PDI or overall Pain and Sleep scores in either population. For the completers, both patients and investigators rated effectiveness higher for CR tramadol than for IR tramadol (P < 0.004 and P < 0.008 for patients and investigators, respectively). CONCLUSION: This study reports significant improvement in pain intensity with CR tramadol as compared with IR tramadol.

Granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor reduces the affinity of SHP-2 for the ITIM of CLECSF6 in neutrophils: a new mechanism of action for SHP-2.

Proteins that bear immunoreceptor tyrosine based inhibitory motifs (ITIM) are believed to participate in the repression of cell activation via phosphatases such as SHP-1, SHP-2 and/or SHIP-1. CLECSF6, also called DCIR, is a transmembrane protein expressed on leukocytes and predominantly on neutrophils that bears one ITIM pattern. This feature confers to CLECSF6 a role in the repression of cell activation. In order to better understand its role in neutrophil signalling, we analysed the binding of phosphatases to the ITIM of CLECSF6. We showed that a peptide bearing the ITIM of CLECSF6 in its phosphorylated form associates with both SHP-1 and SHP-2. Phosphorylated SHP-1 binds the ITIM whereas phosphorylated SHP-2 does not. In addition, granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) reduces the binding of SHP-2 to the ITIM of CLECSF6 while enhancing the phosphorylation level of SHP-2. GM-CSF is known to recruit SHP-2 to its receptor. These data suggest that the phosphorylation of SHP-2 by GM-CSF promotes the binding of SHP-2 to the GM-CSF receptor to the disadvantage of CLECSF6. Therefore, upon a treatment with GM-CSF, SHP-2 could move from a CLECSF6 associated signalosome with a repressor function to a GM-CSF receptor associated signalosome with an activator function.