Burden of Ischemic and Hemorrhagic Stroke Across the US From 1990 to 2019.

Importance: Stroke is a leading cause of death and disability in the US. Accurate and updated measures of stroke burden are needed to guide public health policies. Objective: To present burden estimates of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke in the US in 2019 and describe trends from 1990 to 2019 by age, sex, and geographic location. Design, Setting, and Participants: An in-depth cross-sectional analysis of the 2019 Global Burden of Disease study was conducted. The setting included the time period of 1990 to 2019 in the US. The study encompassed estimates for various types of strokes, including all strokes, ischemic strokes, intracerebral hemorrhages (ICHs), and subarachnoid hemorrhages (SAHs). The 2019 Global Burden of Disease results were released on October 20, 2020. Exposures: In this study, no particular exposure was specifically targeted. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary focus of this analysis centered on both overall and age-standardized estimates, stroke incidence, prevalence, mortality, and DALYs per 100 000 individuals. Results: In 2019, the US recorded 7.09 million prevalent strokes (4.07 million women [57.4%]; 3.02 million men [42.6%]), with 5.87 million being ischemic strokes (82.7%). Prevalence also included 0.66 million ICHs and 0.85 million SAHs. Although the absolute numbers of stroke cases, mortality, and DALYs surged from 1990 to 2019, the age-standardized rates either declined or remained steady. Notably, hemorrhagic strokes manifested a substantial increase, especially in mortality, compared with ischemic strokes (incidence of ischemic stroke increased by 13% [95% uncertainty interval (UI), 14.2%-11.9%]; incidence of ICH increased by 39.8% [95% UI, 38.9%-39.7%]; incidence of SAH increased by 50.9% [95% UI, 49.2%-52.6%]). The downturn in stroke mortality plateaued in the recent decade. There was a discernible heterogeneity in stroke burden trends, with older adults (50-74 years) experiencing a decrease in incidence in coastal areas (decreases up to 3.9% in Vermont), in contrast to an uptick observed in younger demographics (15-49 years) in the South and Midwest US (with increases up to 8.4% in Minnesota). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, the declining age-standardized stroke rates over the past 3 decades suggest progress in managing stroke-related outcomes. However, the increasing absolute burden of stroke, coupled with a notable rise in hemorrhagic stroke, suggests an evolving and substantial public health challenge in the US. Moreover, the significant disparities in stroke burden trends across different age groups and geographic locations underscore the necessity for region- and demography-specific interventions and policies to effectively mitigate the multifaceted and escalating burden of stroke in the country.

Consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the OMERACT Core Outcome Set for shared decision making interventions in rheumatology trials.

OBJECTIVE: To gain consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core domain set for rheumatology trials evaluating shared decision making (SDM) interventions. METHODS: Following the OMERACT Handbook methods, our Working Group (WG), comprised of 90 members, including 17 patient research partners (PRPs) and 73 clinicians and researchers, had six virtual meetings in addition to email exchanges to develop draft definitions and descriptions. The WG then conducted an international survey of its members to gain consensus on the definitions and descriptions. Finally, the WG members had virtual meetings and e-mail exchanges to review survey results and finalize names, definitions and descriptions of the domains. RESULTS: WG members contributed to developing the definitions. Fifty-two members representing four continents and 13 countries completed the survey, including 15 PRPs, 33 clinicians and 37 researchers. PRPs and clinicians/researchers agreed with all definitions and descriptions with agreements ranging from 87% to 100%. Respondents suggested wording changes to the names, definitions and descriptions to better reflect the domains. Discussions led to further simplification and clarification to address common questions/concerns about the domains. CONCLUSION: Our WG reached consensus on the definitions and descriptions of the domains of the core domain set for rheumatology trials of SDM interventions. This step is crucial to understand each domain and provides the foundation to identify instruments to measure each domain for inclusion in the Core Outcome Measurement Set. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The current study provides consensus-based definitions and descriptions for the domains of the OMERACT core domain set for shared decision making interventions from patients/caregivers, clinicians and researchers. This is a crucial step to understand each domain and provides the foundation to identify instruments to measure each domain for inclusion in the Core Outcome Measurement Set for trials of SDM interventions.

Effectiveness of mRNA Booster Vaccine Against Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection and Severe Outcomes Among Persons With and Without Immune Dysfunction: A Retrospective Cohort Study of National Electronic Medical Record Data in the United States.

Background: Real-world evidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) messenger RNA (mRNA) booster effectiveness among patients with immune dysfunction are limited. Methods: We included data from patients in the United States National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) who completed ≥2 doses of mRNA vaccination between 10 December 2020 and 27 May 2022. Immune dysfunction conditions included human immunodeficiency virus infection, solid organ or bone marrow transplant, autoimmune diseases, and cancer. We defined incident COVID-19 BTI as positive results from laboratory tests or diagnostic codes 14 days after at least 2 doses of mRNA vaccination; and severe COVID-19 BTI as hospitalization, invasive cardiopulmonary support, and/or death. We used propensity scores to match boosted versus nonboosted patients and evaluated hazards of incident and severe COVID-19 BTI using Cox regression after matching. Results: Among patients without immune dysfunction, the relative effectiveness of booster (3 doses) after 6 months from the primary (2 doses) vaccination against BTI ranged from 69% to 81% during the Delta-predominant period and from 33% to 39% during the Omicron-predominant period. Relative effectiveness against BTI was lower among patients with immune dysfunction but remained statistically significant in both periods. Boosted patients had lower risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization (hazard ratios [HR] ranged from 0.5 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .48-.53] to 0.63 [95% CI, .56-.70]), invasive cardiopulmonary support, or death (HRs ranged from 0.46 [95% CI, .41-.52] to 0.63 [95% CI, .50-.79]) during both periods. Conclusions: Booster vaccines remain effective against severe COVID-19 BTI throughout the Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, regardless of patients' immune status.

Real-World Treatment and Care Patterns in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Initiating First-Line Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitor Therapy in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Treatment guidelines for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) recommend targeting low disease activity or remission and switching therapies for patients not reaching those targets. We evaluated real-world use of disease activity measures, treatment discontinuation, and switching patterns among patients with RA initiating a first-line tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi). METHODS: Data from adult patients with RA initiating a first-line TNFi were collected from the American Rheumatology Network (January 2014-August 2021). The proportion of patients with recorded disease activity scores (Clinical Disease Activity Index [CDAI] or Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 [RAPID3]) at TNFi initiation was assessed. Among patients with moderate or severe RA at TNFi initiation, reasons for discontinuation and subsequent advanced therapy were evaluated. RESULTS: Among TNFi initiators (n = 15,182), 44.8% recorded a CDAI/RAPID3 score at treatment initiation; of those who did not, 47.0% had recorded a tender and/or swollen joint count or pain score. Among patients with moderate or severe RA (n = 1,651), 52% discontinued their initial TNFi during follow-up, of which 15%, 46%, 28%, and 12% initiated the same TNFi, another TNFi, a non-TNFi biologic, or a Janus kinase inhibitor, respectively. The proportion of patients restarting the same TNFi or initiating another TNFi varied according to TNFi discontinuation reason. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice, over half of patients with RA initiating a first-line TNFi did not have baseline disease activity assessments. Many patients cycled through TNFi despite citing lack of efficacy as the most common reason for discontinuation. Consistent, objective monitoring of treatment response and timely switch to effective therapy is needed in patients with RA.

OMERACT Core outcome measurement set for shared decision making in rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions: a scoping review to identify candidate instruments.

OBJECTIVES: Shared decision making (SDM) is a central tenet in rheumatic and musculoskeletal care. The lack of standardization regarding SDM instruments and outcomes in clinical trials threatens the comparative effectiveness of interventions. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) SDM Working Group is developing a Core Outcome Set for trials of SDM interventions in rheumatology and musculoskeletal health. The working group reached consensus on a Core Outcome Domain Set in 2020. The next step is to develop a Core Outcome Measurement Set through the OMERACT Filter 2.2. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) to identify candidate instruments for the OMERACT Filter 2.2 We systematically reviewed five databases (Ovid MEDLINE®, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and Web of Science). An information specialist designed search strategies to identify all measurement instruments used in SDM studies in adults or children living with rheumatic or musculoskeletal diseases or their important others. Paired reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full text articles. We extracted characteristics of all candidate instruments (e.g., measured construct, measurement properties). We classified candidate instruments and summarized evidence gaps with an adapted version of the Summary of Measurement Properties (SOMP) table. RESULTS: We found 14,464 citations, read 239 full text articles, and included 99 eligible studies. We identified 220 potential candidate instruments. The five most used measurement instruments were the Decisional Conflict Scale (traditional and low literacy versions) (n=38), the Hip/Knee-Decision Quality Instrument (n=20), the Decision Regret Scale (n=9), the Preparation for Decision Making Scale (n=8), and the CollaboRATE (n=8). Only 44 candidate instruments (20%) had any measurement properties reported by the included studies. Of these instruments, only 57% matched with at least one of the 7-criteria adapted SOMP table. CONCLUSION: We identified 220 candidate instruments used in the SDM literature amongst people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. Our classification of instruments showed evidence gaps and inconsistent reporting of measurement properties. The next steps for the OMERACT SDM Working Group are to match candidate instruments with Core Domains, assess feasibility and review validation studies of measurement instruments in rheumatic diseases or other conditions. Development and validation of new instruments may be required for some Core Domains.

Contraception Care Patterns for Adult Females With Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis on Teratogens in the Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness (RISE) Registry.

As patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) age into adulthood, they often require antirheumatic medication.1 Antirheumatic medications used in JIA have significant reproductive considerations in unplanned pregnancies, including teratogenicity and fetal loss.2.

Weight Loss for Patients With Gout and Concomitant Obesity: A Proof-of-Concept Randomized Trial.

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.

Hearing Loss Prevalence, Years Lived With Disability, and Hearing Aid Use in the United States From 1990 to 2019: Findings From the Global Burden of Disease Study.

OBJECTIVES: This article describes key data sources and methods used to estimate hearing loss in the United States, in the Global Burden of Disease study. Then, trends in hearing loss are described for 2019, including temporal trends from 1990 to 2019, changing prevalence over age, severity patterns, and utilization of hearing aids. DESIGN: We utilized population-representative surveys from the United States to estimate hearing loss prevalence for the Global Burden of Disease study. A key input data source in modeled estimates are the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES), years 1988 to 2010. We ran hierarchical severity-specific models to estimate hearing loss prevalence. We then scaled severity-specific models to sum to total hearing impairment prevalence, adjusted estimates for hearing aid coverage, and split estimates by etiology and tinnitus status. We computed years lived with disability (YLDs), which quantifies the amount of health loss associated with a condition depending on severity and creates a common metric to compare the burden of disparate diseases. This was done by multiplying the prevalence of severity-specific hearing loss by corresponding disability weights, with additional weighting for tinnitus comorbidity. RESULTS: An estimated 72.88 million (95% uncertainty interval (UI) 68.53 to 77.30) people in the United States had hearing loss in 2019, accounting for 22.2% (20.9 to 23.6) of the total population. Hearing loss was responsible for 2.24 million (1.56 to 3.11) YLDs (3.6% (2.8 to 4.7) of total US YLDs). Age-standardized prevalence was higher in males (17.7% [16.7 to 18.8]) compared with females (11.9%, [11.2 to 12.5]). While most cases of hearing loss were mild (64.3%, 95% UI 61.0 to 67.6), disability was concentrated in cases that were moderate or more severe. The all-age prevalence of hearing loss in the United States was 28.1% (25.7 to 30.8) higher in 2019 than in 1990, despite stable age-standardized prevalence. An estimated 9.7% (8.6 to 11.0) of individuals with mild to profound hearing loss utilized a hearing aid, while 32.5% (31.9 to 33.2) of individuals with hearing loss experienced tinnitus. Occupational noise exposure was responsible for 11.2% (10.2 to 12.4) of hearing loss YLDs. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate large burden of hearing loss in the United States, with an estimated 1 in 5 people experiencing this condition. While many cases of hearing loss in the United States were mild, growing prevalence, low usage of hearing aids, and aging populations indicate the rising impact of this condition in future years and the increasing importance of domestic access to hearing healthcare services. Large-scale audiometric surveys such as NHANES are needed to regularly assess hearing loss burden and access to healthcare, improving our understanding of who is impacted by hearing loss and what groups are most amenable to intervention.

How to Use Janus Kinase Inhibitors in the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis? A Clinical Assessment of Risks and Benefits.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an updated understanding of risks and benefits of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) versus biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). RECENT FINDINGS: Shared decision-making is needed in choosing between JAKi and bDMARDs. Cardiovascular disease, malignancy, and thromboembolic events guide this choice. In patients with active RA despite methotrexate use, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor is conditionally favored over JAKi for low-cardiovascular-risk patients and strongly favored in those with pre-existing cardiovascular disease or multiple cardiovascular risk factors. Suboptimal treatment of treatment-refractory RA patients may pose a greater absolute cardiovascular risk than with JAKi use. Use of aspirin and statin may be considered to reduce cardiovascular risk. New safety data on JAKi has redefined the treatment approach in RA. JAKi remains an important oral medication option in active RA despite treatment with bDMARDs, especially in those with low cardiovascular risk.

Hypothyroidism Impacts Clinical and Healthcare Utilization Outcomes After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to assess the association of hypothyroidism with outcomes of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) overall and stratified by underlying diagnosis. METHODS: We identified patients undergoing primary THA in a national database from 2016 to 2020. We stratified them based on primary diagnoses into hip osteoarthritis (OA; N = 1,761,960), osteonecrosis (ON; N = 78,275), traumatic fracture (N = 532,910), inflammatory arthritis (IA; N = 3,520), and "other" (N = 90,550). We identified hypothyroidism and complications using secondary diagnoses. Among 2,467,215 patients undergoing primary THA, mean age was 68 years (range, 18 to 90), and 58.3% were women. Complications codes only included initial encounters. We performed time-trends analyses and multivariable-adjusted regression analyses adjusted for demographics, expected primary payer, a comorbidity score, elective versus non-elective admission, and hospital characteristic information, with clinical and healthcare utilization outcome as endpoints. RESULTS: Overall, hypothyroidism was significantly associated with increased LOS, total charges, non-routine discharges, blood transfusions, and prosthetic fractures. In the OA cohort, hypothyroidism was associated with increased LOS, total charges, and non-routine discharges (P < .001 for each), and blood transfusions (P = .02). Hypothyroidism was associated with increased total charges (P = .001) in the ON cohort and with increased LOS, non-routine discharge, and blood transfusion (P < .05 each) in the traumatic fracture cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Hypothyroidism was associated with blood transfusions, prosthetic fractures, and utilization outcomes in THA patients. Tailored intervention strategies for hypothyroidism should be tested for their efficacy to improve THA peri-operative outcomes.

Stakeholder endorsement advancing the implementation of a patient-reported domain for harms in rheumatology clinical trials: Outcome of the OMERACT Safety Working Group.

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.

2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline for the Optimal Timing of Elective Hip or Knee Arthroplasty for Patients With Symptomatic Moderate-to-Severe Osteoarthritis or Advanced Symptomatic Osteonecrosis With Secondary Arthritis for Whom Nonoperative Therapy Is Ineffective.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for the optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty to improve patient-important outcomes including, but not limited to, pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year for patients with symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis of the hip or knee who have previously attempted nonoperative therapy, and for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective, and who have chosen to undergo elective hip or knee arthroplasty (collectively referred to as TJA). METHODS: We developed 13 clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. After a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low), and evidence tables were created. A Voting Panel, including 13 physicians and patients, discussed the PICO questions until consensus was achieved on the direction (for/against) and strength (strong/conditional) of the recommendations. RESULTS: The panel conditionally recommended against delaying TJA to pursue additional nonoperative treatment including physical therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ambulatory aids, and intraarticular injections. It conditionally recommended delaying TJA for nicotine reduction or cessation. The panel conditionally recommended delay for better glycemic control for patients who have diabetes mellitus, although no specific measure or level was identified. There was consensus that obesity by itself was not a reason for delay, but that weight loss should be strongly encouraged, and the increase in operative risk should be discussed. The panel conditionally recommended against delay in patients who have severe deformity or bone loss, or in patients who have a neuropathic joint. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations regarding the optimal timing of TJA in patients who have symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective to improve patient-important outcomes, including pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year. We acknowledge that the evidence is of low quality primarily due to indirectness and hope future research will allow for further refinement of the recommendations.

Outcomes of patients with active cancers and pre-existing cardiovascular diseases infected with SARS-CoV-2.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection on patient with concomitant active cancer and CVD. METHODS: The researchers extracted and analyzed data from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) database between January 1, 2020, and July 22, 2022. They included only patients with acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, defined as a positive test by PCR 21 days before and 5 days after the day of index hospitalization. Active cancers were defined as last cancer drug administered within 30 days of index admission. The "Cardioonc" group consisted of patients with CVD and active cancers. The cohort was divided into four groups: (1) CVD (-), (2) CVD ( +), (3) Cardioonc (-), and (4) Cardioonc ( +), where (-) or ( +) denotes acute SARS-CoV-2 infection status. The primary outcome of the study was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including acute stroke, acute heart failure, myocardial infarction, or all-cause mortality. The researchers analyzed the outcomes by different phases of the pandemic and performed competing-risk analysis for other MACE components and death as a competing event. RESULTS: The study analyzed 418,306 patients, of which 74%, 10%, 15.7%, and 0.3% had CVD (-), CVD ( +), Cardioonc (-), and Cardioonc ( +), respectively. The Cardioonc ( +) group had the highest MACE events in all four phases of the pandemic. Compared to CVD (-), the Cardioonc ( +) group had an odds ratio of 1.66 for MACE. However, during the Omicron era, there was a statistically significant increased risk for MACE in the Cardioonc ( +) group compared to CVD (-). Competing risk analysis showed that all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the Cardioonc ( +) group and limited other MACE events from occurring. When the researchers identified specific cancer types, patients with colon cancer had higher MACE. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the study found that patients with both CVD and active cancer suffered relatively worse outcomes when they had acute SARS-CoV-2 infection during early and alpha surges in the United States. These findings highlight the need for improved management strategies and further research to better understand the impact of the virus on vulnerable populations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline for the Optimal Timing of Elective Hip or Knee Arthroplasty for Patients With Symptomatic Moderate-to-Severe Osteoarthritis or Advanced Symptomatic Osteonecrosis With Secondary Arthritis for Whom Nonoperative Therapy Is Ineffective.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for the optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty to improve patient-important outcomes including, but not limited to, pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year for patients with symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis of the hip or knee who have previously attempted nonoperative therapy, and for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective, and who have chosen to undergo elective hip or knee arthroplasty (collectively referred to as TJA). METHODS: We developed 13 clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. After a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low), and evidence tables were created. A Voting Panel, including 13 physicians and patients, discussed the PICO questions until consensus was achieved on the direction (for/against) and strength (strong/conditional) of the recommendations. RESULTS: The panel conditionally recommended against delaying TJA to pursue additional nonoperative treatment including physical therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ambulatory aids, and intraarticular injections. It conditionally recommended delaying TJA for nicotine reduction or cessation. The panel conditionally recommended delay for better glycemic control for patients who have diabetes mellitus, although no specific measure or level was identified. There was consensus that obesity by itself was not a reason for delay, but that weight loss should be strongly encouraged, and the increase in operative risk should be discussed. The panel conditionally recommended against delay in patients who have severe deformity or bone loss, or in patients who have a neuropathic joint. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations regarding the optimal timing of TJA in patients who have symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective to improve patient-important outcomes, including pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year. We acknowledge that the evidence is of low quality primarily due to indirectness and hope future research will allow for further refinement of the recommendations.

Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory skin condition with multiple systemic treatments and uncertainty regarding their comparative impact on AD outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD systemic treatments. METHODS: For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and GREAT databases from inception to November 29, 2022, for randomized trials addressing systemic treatments and phototherapy for AD. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/e5sna). RESULTS: The 149 included trials (28,686 patients with moderate-to-severe AD) evaluated 75 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, high-dose upadacitinib was among the most effective for 5 of 6 patient-important outcomes; high-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib were among the most effective for 2 outcomes. These Janus kinase inhibitors were among the most harmful in increasing adverse events. With high-certainty evidence, dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab were of intermediate effectiveness and among the safest, modestly increasing conjunctivitis. Low-dose baricitinib was among the least effective. Efficacy and safety of azathioprine, oral corticosteroids, cyclosporine, methotrexate, mycophenolate, phototherapy, and many novel agents are less certain. CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals with moderate-to-severe AD, high-certainty evidence demonstrates that high-dose upadacitinib is among the most effective in addressing multiple patient-important outcomes, but also is among the most harmful. High-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib are effective, but also among the most harmful. Dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab are of intermediate effectiveness and have favorable safety.

2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline for the Optimal Timing of Elective Hip or Knee Arthroplasty for Patients With Symptomatic Moderate-to-Severe Osteoarthritis or Advanced Symptomatic Osteonecrosis With Secondary Arthritis for Whom Nonoperative Therapy Is Ineffective.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for the optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty to improve patient-important outcomes including, but not limited to, pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year for patients with symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis of the hip or knee who have previously attempted nonoperative therapy, and for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective, and who have chosen to undergo elective hip or knee arthroplasty (collectively referred to as TJA). METHODS: We developed 13 clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. After a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low), and evidence tables were created. A Voting Panel, including 13 physicians and patients, discussed the PICO questions until consensus was achieved on the direction (for/against) and strength (strong/conditional) of the recommendations. RESULTS: The panel conditionally recommended against delaying TJA to pursue additional nonoperative treatment including physical therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ambulatory aids, and intraarticular injections. It conditionally recommended delaying TJA for nicotine reduction or cessation. The panel conditionally recommended delay for better glycemic control for patients who have diabetes mellitus, although no specific measure or level was identified. There was consensus that obesity by itself was not a reason for delay, but that weight loss should be strongly encouraged, and the increase in operative risk should be discussed. The panel conditionally recommended against delay in patients who have severe deformity or bone loss, or in patients who have a neuropathic joint. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations regarding the optimal timing of TJA in patients who have symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective to improve patient-important outcomes, including pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year. We acknowledge that the evidence is of low quality primarily due to indirectness and hope future research will allow for further refinement of the recommendations.

Outcomes of Patients with Active Cancers and Pre-Existing Cardiovascular Diseases Infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Objective To determine the impact of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection on patient with concomitant active cancer and CVD. Methods The researchers extracted and analyzed data from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) database between January 1, 2020, and July 22, 2022. They included only patients with acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, defined as a positive test by PCR 21 days before and 5 days after the day of index hospitalization. Active cancers were defined as last cancer drug administered within 30 days of index admission. The "Cardioonc" group consisted of patients with CVD and active cancers. The cohort was divided into four groups: (1) CVD (-), (2) CVD (+), (3) Cardioonc (-), and (4) Cardioonc (+), where (-) or (+) denotes acute SARS-CoV-2 infection status. The primary outcome of the study was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including acute stroke, acute heart failure, myocardial infarction, or all-cause mortality. The researchers analyzed the outcomes by different phases of the pandemic and performed competing-risk analysis for other MACE components and death as a competing event. Results The study analyzed 418,306 patients, of which 74%, 10%, 15.7%, and 0.3% had CVD (-), CVD (+), Cardioonc (-), and Cardioonc (+), respectively. The Cardioonc (+) group had the highest MACE events in all four phases of the pandemic. Compared to CVD (-), the Cardioonc (+) group had an odds ratio of 1.66 for MACE. However, during the Omicron era, there was a statistically significant increased risk for MACE in the Cardioonc (+) group compared to CVD (-). Competing risk analysis showed that all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the Cardioonc (+) group and limited other MACE events from occurring. When the researchers identified specific cancer types, patients with colon cancer had higher MACE. Conclusion In conclusion, the study found that patients with both CVD and active cancer suffered relatively worse outcomes when they had acute SARS-CoV-2 infection during early and alpha surges in the United States. These findings highlight the need for improved management strategies and further research to better understand the impact of the virus on vulnerable populations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Emerging Safety Profile of JAK Inhibitors in Rheumatic Diseases.

Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) medications are small-molecule drugs that affect intracellular signal transduction. They are highly effective oral medications that have been approved for the treatment of various rheumatic diseases, with rheumatoid arthritis being a key example of an autoimmune rheumatic disease. JAKi are oral-route medications that are alternatives to injectable biologic therapies, launched in the late 1990s. While most safety concerns with JAKi are similar to the biologics, there are many differences. New data on comparative safety of JAKi versus tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) were recently published that led to new black box warnings by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) about cardiovascular and cancer risks and a label change for JAKi. This review summarizes the current published data with regards to the safety of JAKi, focused on rheumatic diseases. Specifically, any risk differences between agents or across different indications are discussed, as well as the risk factors for these adverse outcomes.