Intra-articular glucocorticoid injections should not be neglected in the remission targeted treatment of early rheumatoid arthritis: a post hoc analysis from the NEO-RACo trial.

OBJECTIVES: To study the effects of neglecting intra-articular glucocorticoid injections (IAGCIs) into swollen joints in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Ninety-nine patients with early, DMARD naive RA were treated, aiming at remission, with methotrexate, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine, low-dose oral prednisolone and, when needed, IAGCIs for 2 years, and randomised to receive infliximab or placebo from weeks 4 to 26. During each of the 15 study visits, patients were scored retrospectively 0.2-0.4 points (depending on the number of non-injected joints) if IAGCIs to all swollen joints were not given. Patients were divided into tertiles by their cumulative scores for neglected injections (CSNI) over 24 months. 28-joint disease activity score (DAS28) area under the curve (AUC) between 0-24 months, remission rates, changes in quality of life, and radiological changes during the follow-up were assessed. Trends across tertiles of CSNI were tested with generalised linear models. RESULTS: Higher CSNI was associated with lower strict remission rates (p=0.005), and lower quality of life (p=0.004) at 24 months, and higher DAS28 AUC (p<0.001) during the follow-up. At 24 months, DAS28 remission rates were 90%, 93% and 76% (p=0.081), and strict remission rates were 74%, 77% and 39% by tertiles of CSNI. No significant differences were observed in radiological progression (p=0.089). IAGCIs were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Neglecting IAGCIs into swollen joints is associated with lower remission rates, higher disease activity, and lower quality of life. Hence, IAGCIs should be used as an integral part of the targeted treatment of early RA.

Disease activity of idiopathic juvenile arthritis continues through adolescence despite the use of biologic therapies.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the use of DMARDs and biologic treatments and disease activity in patients with JIA referred to the adult rheumatology clinic and to provide further information regarding the need for long-term rheumatologic care. METHODS: We studied the data of 154 patients retrospectively from hospital records if they met the following criteria: diagnosis of JIA and at least one visit to the adult rheumatologic unit. Previous and current antirheumatic treatment, duration of biologic therapy and disease activity were recorded. RESULTS: At the end of patient follow-up, the median age of the eligible patients was 19 years (range 16-24 years) and the disease duration was 8 years (range 0-20 years). Twenty-nine per cent of the patients were still on biologic therapies. The total median duration of treatment with at least one biologic agent was 4.2 years, and 44% of treatment durations lasted >5 years. Some disease activity was present in the last year in 58% of patients. Activity in the temporomandibular joint was detected in 14% and uveitis in 8%. Thirteen per cent did not need further specialist care and in 14% all antirheumatic medication could be tapered off. CONCLUSION: Almost one-third of adolescents and young adults with JIA who needed specialist care were on biologics. The need for treatment in many cases is long term (>5 years). Most patients (58%) still showed evidence of mild disease activity. Adolescents and young adults with JIA are a distinct patient group in adult health care and a specialized multidisciplinary approach to treatment is needed.

Outcome of reactive arthritis after an extensive Finnish waterborne gastroenteritis outbreak: a 1-year prospective follow-up study.

The purpose of the study was to assess the 1-year outcome of definitive reactive arthritis (ReA) after a waterborne outbreak. A cohort of 21 patients (15 females and 6 males, median age 54 years) with ReA related to an extensive waterborne outbreak in Finland was clinically followed-up by rheumatologists with visits at baseline, at 1 month and 3, 6 and 12 months. Although the outcome was in general favourable, 1/3 of the patients had chronic course; 7 (33 %) of the 21 patients needed disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and even 8 (38 %) of them used glucocorticoids at 12 months. Four (19 %) were using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and nine (43 %) other analgesics. Many patients had articular pain and impaired physical function still at 12 months, even though inflammatory parameters and the number of swollen joints were low. Only one patient (5 %) was human leucocyte antigen-B27-positive. She had the most severe ReA and also additional infectious arthritis caused by Salmonella serotype enteritidis leading to osteonecrosis of her hip joint with subsequent need for arthroplasty. ReA as observed in our study was overall fairly mild, but in many individuals, postinfectious arthralgia and DMARD use continued at least up to 1 year.

Measurement of the kidney function in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: plasma cystatin C versus 51Cr-EDTA clearance.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Knowledge of the usefulness of cystatin C measurement in the detection of chronic kidney disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is scant. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of plasma cystatin C- and creatinine-based methods to predict glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and classify chronic kidney disease in RA patients. METHODS: The study population consisted of 64 RA patients aged 41-86 years. Comparisons were made between measured plasma creatinine, cystatin C, creatinine clearance and GFR estimated by the Cockcroft-Gault (CG) and the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) formulas. The plasma clearance of (51)Cr-EDTA served as a reference. RESULTS: The Pearson correlation coefficients between plasma clearance of (51)Cr-EDTA and the markers of GFR were calculated. The correlation coefficients were 0.800 for plasma creatinine, 0.863 for cystatin C, 0.866 and 0.904 for GFR values estimated by MDRD and CG and 0.922 for plasma creatinine clearance. Statistically significant differences were detected between the correlation coefficients of plasma creatinine and GFR estimated by CG (p = 0.0412) and plasma creatinine and creatinine clearance (p = 0.0099). Creatinine clearance and the MDRD and CG formulas proved to be better at identifying GFR <90 ml/min than plasma creatinine or cystatin C. CONCLUSION: We recommend using the CG formula or creatinine clearance for the estimation of the GFR of RA patients instead of solely creatinine or cystatin C in clinical work.