Influence of comorbidities not associated with fibromyalgia on neuropathic pain in patients with psoriatic arthritis: relationship with clinical parameters.

Objective: Neuropathic pain (NP) may influence disease activity assessment in patients with psoriatic arthritis, this relationship being traditionally based on the presence of concomitant fibromyalgia. We analyzed the influence of other comorbidities on NP and the relationship between pain and various clinical parameters. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in patients diagnosed with psoriatic arthritis, excluding patients with a previous diagnosis of fibromyalgia, depression, anxiety, diabetes and/or dyslipidemia under treatment. NP was identified using the painDETECT questionnaire (score > 18). Obesity and related clinical parameters, anxious and depressive symptoms, sleep quality and fatigue were assessed as comorbidities. Disease activity was measured using the clinical Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis (cDAPSA) in peripheral involvement, the ASDAS-PCR in axial involvement, functioning and disease impact were measured using the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index and 12-item Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease questionnaire, respectively. Results: Overall, 246 patients were included (136 men; 55%). The mean age was 53.4 ± 11.0 years. Forty-two patients had NP (17.1%). Patients with NP had higher leptin levels (OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 1.007-1.056; p < 0.01) and poor sleep quality (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.09-1.297; p < 0.001). Patients with NP also had greater fatigue NRS (6.2 ± 2.2 vs. 2.4 ± 0.19, p < 0.001). Patients with NP had higher cDAPSA score (17.3 ± 5.4 vs. 8.9 ± 6.5, p < 0.001), poorer functioning (1.1 ± 0.5 vs. 0.4 ± 0.5, p < 0.001) and greater disease impact (6.1 ± 1.7 vs. 2.6 ± 1.9, p < 0.001). Conclusion: NP was correlated with sleep quality and serum leptin and may be associated with worse disease activity, functioning and disease impact.

Emerging trends in nurse-led programs of care for management of patients with established rheumatoid arthritis: Systematic literature review.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), nurses are considered as essential, not only to ensure pharmacological safety, but also in the promotion in self-care and decision-making, favouring the empowerment of patients. This systematic review aimed to summarize the available literature on the health education by the nurse in patients with RA. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Following Cochrane Collaboration procedures, the PRISMA statement and PRISMA checklist, relevant quantitative studies published were retrieved from the CINAHL, Scopus, PubMed and Medic databases and then systematically reviewed. The search ended in August 2021. Nineteen studies were retained for inclusion and evaluated with the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network for Systematic Reviews. RESULTS: We found statistically significant improvement in self-care (five studies), disease activity (three studies), quality of life (two studies), satisfaction (five studies) and adherence (one study) with the nursing-led management of patients with established rheumatoid arthritis. DISCUSSION: Although there is solid evidence of improvement in satisfaction and self-care, there seems to be a trend also to improve other outcomes, such as DAS28, from the EULAR recommendations, the expansion of the therapeutic arsenal for rheumatoid arthritis and shared decision-making. In addition, recently and due to the implementation of new technologies, the role of the nurse has been evaluated through virtual consultations. The results of recent studies have shown that this an effective and well-accepted novel approach for the management of patients with stable rheumatoid arthritis. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that nurse-led health education, in addition of improvement in satisfaction and self-care, improve activity disease scores in RA patients.

Emerging trends in nurse-led programs of care for management of patients with established rheumatoid arthritis: Systematic literature review / Tendencias emergentes en los programas de atención dirigidos por enfermeras para el manejo de pacientes con artritis reumatoide establecida: Revisión sistemática de la literatura

Introduction: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), nurses are considered as essential, not only to ensure pharmacological safety, but also in the promotion in self-care and decision-making, favouring the empowerment of patients. This systematic review aimed to summarize the available literature on the health education by the nurse in patients with RA. Material and methods: Following Cochrane Collaboration procedures, the PRISMA statement and PRISMA checklist, relevant quantitative studies published were retrieved from the CINAHL, Scopus, PubMed and Medic databases and then systematically reviewed. The search ended in August 2021. Nineteen studies were retained for inclusion and evaluated with the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network for Systematic Reviews. Results: We found statistically significant improvement in self-care (five studies), disease activity (three studies), quality of life (two studies), satisfaction (five studies) and adherence (one study) with the nursing-led management of patients with established rheumatoid arthritis. Discussion: Although there is solid evidence of improvement in satisfaction and self-care, there seems to be a trend also to improve other outcomes, such as DAS28, from the EULAR recommendations, the expansion of the therapeutic arsenal for rheumatoid arthritis and shared decision-making. In addition, recently and due to the implementation of new technologies, the role of the nurse has been evaluated through virtual consultations. The results of recent studies have shown that this an effective and well-accepted novel approach for the management of patients with stable rheumatoid arthritis. Conclusion: Our study suggests that nurse-led health education, in addition of improvement in satisfaction and self-care, improve activity disease scores in RA patients.(AU)

Introducción: En los pacientes con artritis reumatoide, las enfermeras se consideran esenciales, no solo para garantizar la seguridad farmacológica, sino también en la prestación de promoción en el autocuidado y la toma de decisiones, favoreciendo el empoderamiento de los pacientes. Esta revisión sistemática tuvo como objetivo resumir la literatura disponible sobre la educación sanitaria por parte de la enfermera en pacientes con artritis reumatoide. Material y métodos: Siguiendo los procedimientos de la Colaboración Cochrane, la declaración PRISMA y la lista de comprobación PRISMA, se recuperaron los estudios cuantitativos relevantes publicados en las bases de datos CINAHL, Scopus, PubMed y Medic y, a continuación, se revisaron sistemáticamente. La búsqueda finalizó en agosto de 2021. Diecinueve estudios fueron retenidos para su inclusión y evaluados con la Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network for Systematic Reviews. ResultadosSe encontró una mejoría estadísticamente significativa en el autocuidado (cinco estudios), la actividad de la enfermedad (tres estudios), la calidad de vida (dos estudios), la satisfacción (cinco estudios) y la adherencia (un estudio) con el manejo dirigido por enfermería de pacientes con artritis reumatoide establecida. Discusión: Aunque siempre ha habido evidencias de mejora en la satisfacción y el autocuidado, parece haber una tendencia a mejorar también otros resultados, como el de Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints (DAS28), a partir de las recomendaciones de la European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), la ampliación del arsenal terapéutico para la artritis reumatoide y la toma de decisiones compartida. Además, recientemente y debido a la implantación de las nuevas tecnologías, se ha evaluado el papel de la enfermera a través de las consultas virtuales. Los resultados de estudios recientes han demostrado que se trata de un nuevo enfoque...(AU)

SLEEP quality in patients with psoriatic arthritis and its relationship with disease activity and comorbidities: a cross-sectional study.

The assessment of psoriatic arthritis is complex and multidimensional. It is increasingly common to include the patient perspective using patient-reported outcomes. Although some research has explored sleep quality in patients with psoriatic arthritis, most studies have had small sample sizes, failed to assess sleep quality considering the inflammatory process together with the psychological well-being of patients, and have not described any use of sleep medication. Further, research to date has not provided data on the relationship of sleep quality with axial forms. In this context, the objective of this study was to assess sleep quality in patients with psoriatic arthritis and its relationship with clinical characteristics, disease activity, functioning, disease impact, fatigue and psychological status. A cross-sectional study was conducted including 247 consecutive patients with PsA recruited during 2021. Sleep quality was measured using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. We assessed correlations of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index score with peripheral disease activity (Disease Activity Index for PSoriatic Arthritis), axial disease activity (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score-C-reactive protein and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index), functioning (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index and Health Assessment Questionnaire), impact (Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease questionnaire), anxiety, depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) and fatigue (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue) scores. A multiple linear regression model was constructed with PSQI as the dependent variable and as independent variables those that could influence sleep quality. Nearly two-thirds (63.15%) of patients had poor sleep quality. Poorer sleep quality was associated with being female, higher joint counts, greater peripheral and axial disease activity, fatigue, anxiety and depression, functioning and disease impact (p < 0.001). Multiple linear regression analysis found that pain (ß: 0.3; p < 0.007) and fatigue ß: - 0.1; p < 0.001 contributed 40% to the sleep quality model. Poor sleep quality was common among patients with psoriatic arthritis. Emotional factors (fatigue, anxiety) seemed more important than inflammatory factors in sleep quality.

Specific Cellular and Humoral Response after the Third Dose of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 RNA Vaccine in Patients with Immune-Mediated Rheumatic Diseases on Immunosuppressive Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Data on cellular and humoral immunogenicity after the third dose of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with immune-mediated rheumatic diseases (IMRDs) are scarce. Herein, we evaluated the adaptive immune response in IMRD patients treated with different immunosuppressive therapies (conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [csDMARDs], biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [bDMARDs], and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [tsDMARDs]) after the booster of the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine to determine whether any drug reduced the vaccine's response. METHODS: A single-center prospective study was conducted, including patients presenting with IMRD and healthy controls (HC). Specific anti-SARS-CoV-2 interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) production was evaluated between 8-12 weeks after the third dose of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. In addition, anti-Spike IgG antibody titers were also measured. RESULTS: Samples were obtained from 79 IMRD patients (51 women, 28 men; mean age 57 ± 11.3 years old): 43 rheumatoid arthritis, 10 psoriatic arthritis, 14 ankylosing spondylitis, 10 undifferentiated spondyloarthritis, and 2 inflammatory bowel disease-associated spondyloarthritis (IBD-SpA). In total, 31 HC (mean age 50.9 ± 13.1 years old, 67.7% women) were included in the study. Post-vaccine results displayed positive T-cell immune responses in 68 out of 79 (86.1%) IMRD patients (82.3% of those without prior COVID-19). All HC and IMRDs patients had an antibody response against the SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain; however, the HC response was significantly higher (median of 18,048 AU/mL) than in IMRDs patients (median of 6590.3 AU/mL, p < 0.001). MTX and leflunomide were associated with lower titers of IgG and IFN-γ responses. Among bDMARDs, adalimumab, etanercept, and guselkumab are associated with reduced cellular responses. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary data show that the majority of our IMRD patients develop cellular and humoral responses after the SARS-CoV-2 booster vaccination, emphasizing the relevance of vaccination in this group. However, the magnitude of specific responses was dependent on the immunosuppressive therapy administered. Specific vaccination protocols and personalized decisions about boosters are essential for these patients.

Effects of disease activity on lipoprotein levels in patients with early arthritis: can oxidized LDL cholesterol explain the lipid paradox theory?

BACKGROUND: An increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) complications has been described in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). It is the result of the combined effect of classic CV risk factors and others that are specific to the disease. METHODS: We assessed data from 448 early arthritis (EA) patients: 79% women, age (median [p25-p75]) at onset: 55 [44-67] years and disease duration at study entry 5 [3-8] months; and 72% fulfilled the 1987 RA criteria at 2 years of follow-up. Rheumatoid factor was positive in 54% of patients and anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies in 50%. The follow-up of patients ranged from 2 to 5 years with more than 1400 visits with lipoprotein measurements available (mean 2.5 visits/patient). Demographic- and disease-related variables were systematically recorded. Total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein (HDL-C), and low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C) levels were obtained from routine laboratory tests. Oxidized-LDL (oxLDL-C) levels were assessed using a commercial ELISA kit. We fitted population-averaged models nested by patient and visit to determine the effect of independent variables on serum levels of TC, its fractions, and oxLDL-C. RESULTS: After adjustment for several confounders, high-disease activity was significantly associated with decreased TC, HDL-C, and LDL-C levels and increased oxLDL-C levels. Standardized coefficients showed that the effect of disease activity was greater on oxLDL-C and HDL-C. Interestingly, we observed that those patients with lower levels of LDL-C showed higher oxLDL-C/LDL-C ratios. CONCLUSIONS: High-disease activity in EA patients results in changes in the HDL-C and oxLDL-C levels, which in turn may contribute to the increased risk of CV disease observed in these patients.

Índices de gravedad en la artritis reumatoide: una revisión sistemática / Severity indices in rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review

Objetivo: Identificar herramientas diseñadas para evaluar la gravedad global de los pacientes con artritis reumatoide (AR) para su uso en la investigación de marcadores pronósticos de artritis precoz. Métodos: Revisión sistemática de estudios cuyo objetivo fuera el desarrollo o validación de índices de gravedad en AR. Se valoró la calidad metodológica mediante la lista de comprobación COSMIN. Además, se evaluó la claridad de definición, viabilidad y probabilidad de estar presente durante los 2 primeros años de evolución. Resultados: Después de revisar 3.519 artículos, se identificaron 3 índices de gravedad. La Patient Activity Scale (PAS) valoró si el tratamiento previo o actual predecía la gravedad de la AR, medida mediante el patient-reported PAS. Las variables de tratamiento no permitieron distinguir entre los cuartiles superior e inferior de la PAS. El CIRAS incluye las variables edad, sexo, síndrome de Felty, número de visitas al reumatólogo y al rehabilitador, factor reumatoide (FR), recuento de plaquetas, marcadores inflamatorios y paneles bioquímicos solicitados. Su correlación fue baja (r=0,56), con un índice previamente validado por el mismo grupo investigador, el RARBIS, con el DAS28-PCR (r = 0,07) y el Multidimensional Health Assesment Questionnaire (MD-HAQ) (r=0,008). Por último, el RARBIS, utilizado para validar el CIRAS, fue ideado como un índice de gravedad de AR basado en registros médicos. Incluye como dominios cirugía, radiología, manifestaciones extraarticulares, clínica y variables de laboratorio, elegidas previamente por un panel de expertos. Este índice presentó una correlación débil con la intensidad de tratamiento (r = 0,35) y con el DAS 28 (r = 0,41). Conclusión: No existe ningún índice para valorar la gravedad de la AR sobre la base del curso evolutivo de los 2 primeros años de seguimiento y que se adapte a la estrategia terapéutica actual. Por lo tanto, creemos razonable el desarrollo de un nuevo índice de gravedad ad hoc para pacientes con artritis de reciente comienzo

Objective: To identify tools designed to evaluate the severity of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in order to use them in the investigation of prognostic markers in early arthritis. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of studies that developed/validated an index for RA disease severity. They were analyzed using the COSMIN checklist to assess their methodological quality. In addition, all the variables included were evaluated for their clarity of definition, feasibility and probability of being present in each outcome during the first 2 years of the disease course. To estimate redundancy, variables were grouped by domains. Results: After reviewing 3,519 articles, 3 studies were included. The first study, the PAS, assessed whether current and lifetime treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and/or biologics accurately predicted RA severity, as measured by the patient-reported PAS. Treatment variables did not fully distinguish patients in the highest and lowest quartiles of PAS scores. Another severity index, the Claims-Based Index for RA Severity (CIRAS), included the variables age, sex, Felty's syndrome, number of rehabilitation and rheumatology visits, test for inflammatory markers, number of chemistry panels/platelet counts ordered and rheumatoid factor test. The correlation was low (r=0.56) with an index previously validated by the same research group, the RA medical records-based index of severity (RARBIS), with Disease Activity Score-C-reactive protein (DAS28-PCR) (r=0.07) and Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MD-HAQ) (r=0.008). Finally, the RARBIS, used to validate the CIRAS, was devised as an RA severity index based on medical records. It includes as domains surgery, radiology, extra-articular manifestations, clinical and laboratory variables, previously chosen by an expert panel. RARBIS had a weak correlation with treatment intensity (r=0.35) and with DAS28 (r=0.41). Conclusion: There is no index to assess the severity of RA based on the course of the first 2 years of follow-up that is adapted to the current strategy of therapeutic management of this disease. Therefore, we believe it is reasonable to develop a new ad hoc severity index for patients with early arthritis

Severity indices in rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review. / Índices de gravedad en la artritis reumatoide: una revisión sistemática.

OBJECTIVE: To identify tools designed to evaluate the severity of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in order to use them in the investigation of prognostic markers in early arthritis. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of studies that developed/validated an index for RA disease severity. They were analyzed using the COSMIN checklist to assess their methodological quality. In addition, all the variables included were evaluated for their clarity of definition, feasibility and probability of being present in each outcome during the first 2 years of the disease course. To estimate redundancy, variables were grouped by domains. RESULTS: After reviewing 3,519 articles, 3 studies were included. The first study, the PAS, assessed whether current and lifetime treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and/or biologics accurately predicted RA severity, as measured by the patient-reported PAS. Treatment variables did not fully distinguish patients in the highest and lowest quartiles of PAS scores. Another severity index, the Claims-Based Index for RA Severity (CIRAS), included the variables age, sex, Felty's syndrome, number of rehabilitation and rheumatology visits, test for inflammatory markers, number of chemistry panels/platelet counts ordered and rheumatoid factor test. The correlation was low (r=0.56) with an index previously validated by the same research group, the RA medical records-based index of severity (RARBIS), with Disease Activity Score-C-reactive protein (DAS28-PCR) (r=0.07) and Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MD-HAQ) (r=0.008). Finally, the RARBIS, used to validate the CIRAS, was devised as an RA severity index based on medical records. It includes as domains surgery, radiology, extra-articular manifestations, clinical and laboratory variables, previously chosen by an expert panel. RARBIS had a weak correlation with treatment intensity (r=0.35) and with DAS28 (r=0.41). CONCLUSION: There is no index to assess the severity of RA based on the course of the first 2 years of follow-up that is adapted to the current strategy of therapeutic management of this disease. Therefore, we believe it is reasonable to develop a new ad hoc severity index for patients with early arthritis.

Are rheumatologists adhering to the concepts window of opportunity and treat-to-target? Earlier and more intense disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug treatment over time in patients with early arthritis in the PEARL study.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse changes over time in the treatment with disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and biological therapies prescribed to patients from an early arthritis register and whether these changes had an impact on their outcome. METHODS: This was a longitudinal retrospective 2-year study based on data collected in the PEARL study. The population was clustered in three groups depending on year of symptoms onset (2000-2004, 2005-2009, 2010-2014). Intensity of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug treatment was calculated and the percentage of patients receiving biological therapy during the first 2-year follow-up was collected. Disease activity and remission at the end of follow-up, as well as radiological progression were the outcomes analysed. Multivariable analyses were fitted to determine which variables including the three period times were associated with the outcomes. RESULTS: A significant increase in treatment intensity was observed in patients with undifferentiated arthritis, getting closer to that prescribed to patients fulfilling the 1987 RA criteria at the last period studied (2010-2014). This finding was associated with a significantly higher percentage of patients in remission and lower progression of the erosion component of the Sharp van der Heijde score. CONCLUSIONS: During the last 15 years, the treatment of patients with early arthritis in our hospital has been progressively increased and it has been associated with significantly better outcomes.

Development and validation of a multivariate predictive model for rheumatoid arthritis mortality using a machine learning approach.

We developed and independently validated a rheumatoid arthritis (RA) mortality prediction model using the machine learning method Random Survival Forests (RSF). Two independent cohorts from Madrid (Spain) were used: the Hospital Clínico San Carlos RA Cohort (HCSC-RAC; training; 1,461 patients), and the Hospital Universitario de La Princesa Early Arthritis Register Longitudinal study (PEARL; validation; 280 patients). Demographic and clinical-related variables collected during the first two years after disease diagnosis were used. 148 and 21 patients from HCSC-RAC and PEARL died during a median follow-up time of 4.3 and 5.0 years, respectively. Age at diagnosis, median erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and number of hospital admissions showed the higher predictive capacity. Prediction errors in the training and validation cohorts were 0.187 and 0.233, respectively. A survival tree identified five mortality risk groups using the predicted ensemble mortality. After 1 and 7 years of follow-up, time-dependent specificity and sensitivity in the validation cohort were 0.79-0.80 and 0.43-0.48, respectively, using the cut-off value dividing the two lower risk categories. Calibration curves showed overestimation of the mortality risk in the validation cohort. In conclusion, we were able to develop a clinical prediction model for RA mortality using RSF, providing evidence for further work on external validation.

Cut-Offs and Response Criteria for the Hospital Universitario La Princesa Index (HUPI) and Their Comparison to Widely-Used Indices of Disease Activity in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate cut-off points and to establish response criteria for the Hospital Universitario La Princesa Index (HUPI) in patients with chronic polyarthritis. METHODS: Two cohorts, one of early arthritis (Princesa Early Arthritis Register Longitudinal [PEARL] study) and other of long-term rheumatoid arthritis (Estudio de la Morbilidad y Expresión Clínica de la Artritis Reumatoide [EMECAR]) including altogether 1200 patients were used to determine cut-off values for remission, and for low, moderate and high activity through receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis. The areas under ROC (AUC) were compared to those of validated indexes (SDAI, CDAI, DAS28). ROC analysis was also applied to establish minimal and relevant clinical improvement for HUPI. RESULTS: The best cut-off points for HUPI are 2, 5 and 9, classifying RA activity as remission if ≤2, low disease activity if >2 and ≤5), moderate if >5 and <9 and high if ≥9. HUPI's AUC to discriminate between low-moderate activity was 0.909 and between moderate-high activity 0.887. DAS28's AUCs were 0.887 and 0.846, respectively; both indices had higher accuracy than SDAI (AUCs: 0.832 and 0.756) and CDAI (AUCs: 0.789 and 0.728). HUPI discriminates remission better than DAS28-ESR in early arthritis, but similarly to SDAI. The HUPI cut-off for minimal clinical improvement was established at 2 and for relevant clinical improvement at 4. Response criteria were established based on these cut-off values. CONCLUSIONS: The cut-offs proposed for HUPI perform adequately in patients with either early or long term arthritis.

Consensus statement on a framework for the management of comorbidity and extra-articular manifestations in rheumatoid arthritis.

The objective of the study was to develop evidence-based and practical recommendations for the detection and management of comorbidity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in daily practice. We used a modified RAND/UCLA methodology and systematic review (SR). The process map and specific recommendations, based on the SR, were established in discussion groups. A two round Delphi survey permitted (1) to prioritize the recommendations, (2) to refine them, and (3) to evaluate their agreement by a large group of users. The recommendations cover: (1) which comorbidities should be investigated in clinical practice at the first and following visits (including treatments, risk factors and patient's features that might interfere with RA management); (2) how and when should comorbidities and risk factors be investigated; (3) how to manage specific comorbidities, related or non-related to RA, including major adverse events of RA treatment, and to promote health (general and musculoskeletal health); and (4) specific recommendations to assure an integral care approach for RA patients with any comorbidity, such as health care models for chronic inflammatory patients, early arthritis units, relationships with primary care, specialized nursing care, and self-management. These recommendations are intended to guide rheumatologists, patients, and other stakeholders, on the early diagnosis and management of comorbidity in RA, in order to improve disease outcomes.

Safety of allopurinol compared with other urate-lowering drugs in patients with gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

UNLABELLED: Allopurinol is the most widely used urate-lowering drug (ULD). Together with efficacy and cost, safety is an aspect that helps taking clinical decisions. This systematic review analyzes allopurinol safety. The literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (January 2014). SELECTION CRITERIA: (a) patients >18, (b) gout by the ACR criteria or evidence of urate crystal in synovial fluid, (c) comparator (placebo or other ULD), and (d) RCTs, cohorts, or meta-analysis. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: rate of adverse events and death. The quality was assessed with the Jadad's scale. A meta-analysis with fixed effects was performed. From 544 studies, seven met the eligibility criteria and were included. All RCT presented a low power for safety. All RCTs included a mixed population of patients with gout and hyperuricemia. Allopurinol (300 mg) was compared to febuxostat (40-240 mg) in five RCTs, to benzbromarone and probenecid in two RCTs, and to placebo in one. In the RCTs comparing allopurinol with benzbromarone and probenecid, the highest discontinuation rate was with probenecid (26 %), followed by allopurinol (11 %) and benzbromarone (4 %). The incidence of adverse events was similar between allopurinol (range 38.6-85) and febuxostat (range 41.8-80). Six patients on febuxostat and three on allopurinol died during the studies; no deaths were judged related to drug. The combined risk of adverse events was RR = 1.04 (95 % CI 0.98, 1.11). Allopurinol is a safe option, slightly better than other ULDs. The grade of evidence is high, but further research is needed to evaluate higher doses and long-term safety.

A meta-analysis of mortality in rheumatic diseases

Introducción: Los datos de mortalidad en las enfermedades reumáticas es muy variable. El objetivo de esta revisión sistemática y meta-análisis de datos publicados es proporcionar una visión general más precisa del riesgo actual y mortalidad en las enfermedades reumáticas. Métodos: Revisión sistemática y meta-análisis de estudios publicados e identificados por una búsqueda utilizando texto libre y sinónimos MeSH de "mortalidad" y "enfermedades reumáticas", en general, y por diagnósticos específicos. Los criterios de selección fueron: 1) población de estudio con artritis reumatoide, lupus eritematoso sistémico, esclerosis sistémica, vasculitis, osteoartritis, osteoporosis, dermatomiositis, o espondiloartritis, 2) resultados de mortalidad de interés, reportados como SMR, o fácilmente calculados a partir de los datos comunicados, y 3) cohortes longitudinales o estudios observacionales. Evaluación del riesgo de sesgo basado en la escala de cohortes New Castle-Ottawa, sólo estudios de moderada a alta calidad fueron incluidos. Se calculó meta-SMR para diagnósticos específicos. La heterogeneidad se estudió con meta-regresión. Resultados: Un total de 32 estudios fueron incluidos, ninguno de espondiloartritis o osteoartritis. El SMR general combinada fue 2,03 (IC 95%: 1,79 a 2,29), desde 1,36 en la artritis psoriásica a 4,80 en las vasculitis. El mayor SMR general individual fue a partir de estudios sobre enfermedades inflamatorias, y SMR específicos fueron muy altos para las infecciones y reacciones pulmonares. La heterogeneidad entre los estudios era grande, sin embargo, el análisis de heterogeneidad dentro de las enfermedades no presentó ninguna asociación con las variables recogidas. Conclusiones: En base a los resultados y la buena calidad de los estudios incluidos, se puede concluir que las enfermedades reumáticas en general aumentan el riesgo de muerte, y especialmente las enfermedades inflamatorias (AU)

Introduction: Data reporting mortality in rheumatic diseases vary widely. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis of published data is to provide an accurate overview of the current risk of mortality in rheumatic diseases. Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies identified by a sensitive search using free text and MeSH synonyms of "mortality" and of "rheumatic diseases", in general and by specific diagnoses. Eligibility criteria were (1) study population with rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythemathosus, systemic sclerosis, vasculitis, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, dermatomyositis, or spondyloarthritis; (2) outcome of interest mortality, reported as an standardized mortality ratio (SMR), or easily calculated from data reported; and (3) cohorts or longitudinal observational studies. Assessment of risk of bias relied on the New Castle-Ottawa scale for cohorts; only moderate to high quality studies were included. Separate meta-SMRs were calculated for specific diagnoses. Heterogeneity was studied with meta-regression. Results: A total of 32 studies were included, none in spondyloarthritis or osteoarthritis. The overall pooled SMR was 2.03 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.79-2.29), ranging from 1.36 in psoriatic arthritis to 4.80 in vasculitis. The largest individual overall SMR came from studies on inflammatory diseases, and the specific SMR were very high for infections and pulmonary events. Heterogeneity between studies was large; however, the analysis of such heterogeneity within diseases did not provide any association with the collected variables. Conclusions: Based on our results and on the good quality of the included studies, we can conclude that rheumatic diseases increase in general the risk of death, and especially inflammatory diseases (AU)

A meta-analysis of mortality in rheumatic diseases.

INTRODUCTION: Data reporting mortality in rheumatic diseases vary widely. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis of published data is to provide an accurate overview of the current risk of mortality in rheumatic diseases. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies identified by a sensitive search using free text and MeSH synonyms of "mortality" and of "rheumatic diseases", in general and by specific diagnoses. Eligibility criteria were (1) study population with rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythemathosus, systemic sclerosis, vasculitis, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, dermatomyositis, or spondyloarthritis; (2) outcome of interest mortality, reported as an standardized mortality ratio (SMR), or easily calculated from data reported; and (3) cohorts or longitudinal observational studies. Assessment of risk of bias relied on the New Castle-Ottawa scale for cohorts; only moderate to high quality studies were included. Separate meta-SMRs were calculated for specific diagnoses. Heterogeneity was studied with meta-regression. RESULTS: A total of 32 studies were included, none in spondyloarthritis or osteoarthritis. The overall pooled SMR was 2.03 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.79-2.29), ranging from 1.36 in psoriatic arthritis to 4.80 in vasculitis. The largest individual overall SMR came from studies on inflammatory diseases, and the specific SMR were very high for infections and pulmonary events. Heterogeneity between studies was large; however, the analysis of such heterogeneity within diseases did not provide any association with the collected variables. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our results and on the good quality of the included studies, we can conclude that rheumatic diseases increase in general the risk of death, and especially inflammatory diseases.

Estimated cutoff points for the 28-joint disease activity score based on C-reactive protein in a longitudinal register of early arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cutoff points for the 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) calculated using C-reactive protein (CRP) measurements from patients with early arthritis. METHODS: We analyzed data from 568 visits of 207 patients enrolled in our prospective longitudinal register of early arthritis. Six rheumatologists evaluated the degree of disease activity at each visit on the basis of the available clinical data, and the final degree of disease activity was established by consensus. DAS28 values were calculated for each visit using CRP or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). Through a ROC analysis, cutoff points for both indices, as well as for minimal disease activity (MDA), were selected on the basis of the best tradeoff values between sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: The cutoff values to classify disease activity with the DAS28-CRP were 2.3, 3.8, and 4.9, considering remission at < 2.3, low disease activity 2.3-3.8, moderate disease activity 3.8-4.9, and high disease activity > 4.9. The cutoff value for MDA when calculated with CRP was 2.6. The area under the ROC curves was always greater for DAS28-CRP than for DAS28-ESR, reaching statistical significance for low/moderate activity and for the MDA. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms that the cutoff points for DAS28-CRP are lower than those described for DAS28-ESR, suggesting that DAS28-CRP may be more accurate to assess disease activity in our population.