Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 139
Filtrar
1.
J Rheumatol ; 2021 Feb 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33589562

RESUMO

At the 2020 Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)- Collaborative Research Network (CRN) annual meeting, the GRAPPA-CRN group presented a pilot investigator-initiated study protocol to test electronic case report forms (eCRFs) and proposed Standardized Operating Procedures (SOPs) to evaluate biomarkers of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) associated with axial disease. The progress on 3 studies was also presented: BioDAM PsA (Biomarkers as Predictors of structural DAMage in PsA; to validate soluble biomarkers as predictors of structural damage in PsA), PreventPsA (examining the development of PsA and risk factors among patients with psoriasis and no arthritis), and PredictORPsA (Predicting Treatment respOnse in patients with eaRly PsA; in collaboration with Pfizer using samples from the Oral Psoriatic Arthritis TriaL [OPAL], to identify biomarkers of treatment response). GRAPPA-CRN funding partnerships and applications are also underway with both the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) in Europe and Accelerating Medicines Partnerships (AMP) 2.0 in the USA, and the progress of these applications and associated objectives were presented.

2.
RMD Open ; 7(1)2021 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33547229

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The rheumatoid arthritis impact of disease (RAID) questionnaire comprises seven patient-important domains of disease impact (pain, function, fatigue, sleep disturbance, emotional well-being, physical well-being, coping). RAID was validated as a pooled-weighted score. Its seven individual items separately could provide a valuable tool in clinical practice to guide interventions targeting the patient's experience of the disease. The aim was to separately assess the psychometric properties of each of the seven numeric rating scale (NRS) of the RAID (RAID.7). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Post hoc analyses of data from the cross-sectional RAID study and from the Rainbow study, an open-label 12-week trial of etanercept in patients with RA. Construct validity of each NRS was assessed cross-sectionally in the RAID data set by Spearman's correlation with the respective external instrument of reference. Using the rainbow data set, we assessed reliability through intraclass correlation coefficient between the screening and the baseline visits and responsiveness (sensitivity to change) by standardised response mean between baseline and 12 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 671 patients with RA with features of established disease were analysed, 563 and 108 from RAID and Rainbow, respectively. The NRS correlated moderately to strongly with the respective external instrument of reference (r=0.62-0.81). Reliability ranged from 0.64 (0.51-0.74) (pain) to 0.83 (0.76-0.88) (sleep disturbance) and responsiveness from 0.93 (0.73-1.13) (sleep disturbance) to 1.34 (1.01-1.64) (pain). CONCLUSION: The separate use of the individual NRS of RAID (RAID.7) is valid, feasible, reliable and sensitive to change, representing an opportunity to improve the assessment and treatment of disease impact with minimal questionnaire burden. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00768053.

3.
RMD Open ; 6(3)2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33188136

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Review of efficacy and safety of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibition in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). METHODS: A systematic literature research (SLR) of all publications on JAK inhibitors (JAKi) treatment published until March 2019 using MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. Efficacy and safety were assessed in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), integrating long-term extension periods additionally for safety evaluation. RESULTS: 3454 abstracts were screened with 85 included in the final analysis (efficacy and RCT safety: n=72; safety only: n=13). Efficacy of RCTs investigating tofacitinib (TOFA, n=27), baricitinib (BARI, n=9), upadacitinib (UPA, n=14), filgotinib (FILGO, n=7), decernotinib (DEC, n=3) and peficitinib (PEF, n=7) was evaluated. Six head-to-head trials comparing JAKi with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) were included. Efficacy of JAKi was shown in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for all agents, psoriatic arthritis (TOFA, FILGO), ankylosing spondylitis (TOFA, FILGO), systemic lupus erythematosus (BARI), chronic plaque psoriasis (TOFA, BARI, PEF), ulcerative colitis (TOFA, UPA), Crohn's disease (UPA, FILGO) and atopic dermatitis (TOFA, BARI, UPA). Safety analysis of 72 RCTs, one cohort study and 12 articles on long-term extension studies showed increased risks for infections, especially herpes zoster, serious infections and numerically higher rates of venous thromboembolic events. No increased malignancy rates or major adverse cardiac events were observed. CONCLUSION: JAKi provide good efficacy compared to placebo (and to TNFi in RA and Pso) across various IMIDs with an acceptable safety profile. This SLR informed the task force on points to consider for the treatment of IMIDs with JAKi with the available evidence.

4.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 2020 Nov 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33158881

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have been approved for use in various immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. With five agents licensed, it was timely to summarise the current understanding of JAKi use based on a systematic literature review (SLR) on efficacy and safety. METHODS: Existing data were evaluated by a steering committee and subsequently reviewed by a 29 person expert committee leading to the formulation of a consensus statement that may assist the clinicians, patients and other stakeholders once the decision is made to commence a JAKi. The committee included patients, rheumatologists, a gastroenterologist, a haematologist, a dermatologist, an infectious disease specialist and a health professional. The SLR informed the Task Force on controlled and open clinical trials, registry data, phase 4 trials and meta-analyses. In addition, approval of new compounds by, and warnings from regulators that were issued after the end of the SLR search date were taken into consideration. RESULTS: The Task Force agreed on and developed four general principles and a total of 26 points for consideration which were grouped into six areas addressing indications, treatment dose and comedication, contraindications, pretreatment screening and risks, laboratory and clinical follow-up examinations, and adverse events. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendations were determined based on the SLR and levels of agreement were voted on for every point, reaching a range between 8.8 and 9.9 on a 10-point scale. CONCLUSION: The consensus provides an assessment of evidence for efficacy and safety of an important therapeutic class with guidance on issues of practical management.

6.
RMD Open ; 6(3)2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33148784

RESUMO

Health resource use and identification of related costs are two essential steps in health economics assessment. The elicited costs will be balanced with health outcome improvement and enable the comparison of different diagnostic procedures or therapeutic strategies from a health economic point of view. The cost typology can be disentangled in three main components, that is, direct cost related to health resource use, indirect costs related to productivity loss and sometimes intangible costs (costs related to pain and suffering). These costs can be elicited from different perspectives depending on the general aim of the assessment: payer, societal perspective or patient perspective. Practically, the first step corresponds to the quantification of health resource use, that is, number of consultations, biological or imaging workups, hospitalisation, dispensed medication units or days on sick leave. It can be done by specific self-questionnaires or by access to insurance health databases. The second step is then to value each health resource use item, based on available public databases-either produced by insurance entities or statistics institute-providing the unit costs for each item. Importantly, substantial variability does exist in the costing exercise, requiring accepting a certain uncertainty around cost estimates. This can be taken into account by sensitivity analyses, which capture in what extent measurement error can impact cost assessment, depending on different hypotheses or assumptions. One essential element of health economic assessment is the identification of costs incurred by or associated with a specific health condition for a study on the economic burden of a disease-cost-of-illness study-or with a given diagnostic or therapeutic intervention in the context of health technology assessment in which these costs are compared with the alternative reference strategy-cost-effectiveness study.

9.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 2020 Oct 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33055082

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Initiative established the Contextual Factors Working Group to guide the understanding, identification and handling of contextual factors for clinical trials. In clinical research, different uses of the term 'contextual factors' exist. This study explores the perspectives of researchers (including clinicians) and patients in defining 'contextual factor' and its related terminology, identifying such factors and accounting for them in trials across rheumatology. METHODS: We conducted individual semistructured interviews with researchers (including clinicians) who have experience within the field of contextual factors in clinical trials or other potentially relevant areas, and small focus group interviews with patients with rheumatic conditions. We transcribed the interviews and applied qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed 12 researchers and 7 patients. Researcher's and patient's descriptions of contextual factors were categorised into two broad themes, each comprising two contextual factors types. The 'treatment effect' theme focused on factors explaining variations in treatment effects (A) among patients and (B) among studies. The 'outcome measurement' theme focused on factors that explain (C) variations in the measurement result itself (apart from actual changes/differences in the outcome) and (D) variations in the outcome itself (beside treatment of interest). Methods for identifying and handling contextual factors differed among these themes and types. CONCLUSIONS: Two main themes for contextual factors with four types of contextual factors were identified based on input from researchers and patients. This will guide operationalisation of contextual factors. Further research should refine our findings and establish consensus among relevant stakeholders.

10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33026713

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To identify and describe health literacy profiles of patients with rheumatic diseases and explore whether the identified health literacy profiles can be generalized to a broader rheumatology context. METHODS: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis and gout from three hospitals in different regions in the Netherlands completed the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ). Hierarchical cluster analysis was used to identify patients' health literacy profiles based on nine HLQ domains. A multinomial regression model with the identified health literacy profiles as the dependent variable was fitted to assess whether patients with a given disease type or attending a given hospital were more likely to belong to a specific profile. RESULTS: Among 895 participating patients, lowest mean HLQ domain scores (indicating most difficulty) were found for "Critical appraisal", "Navigating the health system" and "Finding good health information". The ten identified profiles revealed substantial diversity in combinations of strengths and weaknesses. While 42% of patients scored moderate to high on all nine domains (profiles 1 and 3), another 42% of patients (profiles 2, 4, 5 and 6) clearly struggled with one or several aspects of health literacy. Notably, 16% (profiles 7 to 10) exhibited difficulty across a majority of health literacy domains. The probability of belonging to one of the profiles was independent of hospital attended or type of rheumatic disease. CONCLUSION: Ten distinct health literacy profiles were identified among patients with rheumatic diseases, independent of disease type and treating hospital. These profiles can be used to facilitate health literacy intervention development in rheumatology.

13.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 79(11): 1423-1431, 2020 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32873554

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: As part of European League against Rheumatism (EULAR)/European Musculoskeletal Conditions Surveillance and Information Network, 20 user-focused standards of care (SoCs) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) addressing 16 domains of care were developed. This study aimed to explore gaps in implementation of these SoCs across Europe. METHODS: Two cross-sectional surveys on the importance, level of and barriers (patients only) to implementation of each SoC (0-10, 10 highest) were designed to be conducted among patients and rheumatologists in 50 European countries. Care gaps were calculated as the difference between the actual and maximum possible score for implementation (ie, 10) multiplied by the care importance score, resulting in care gaps (0-100, maximal gap). Factors associated with the problematic care gaps (ie, gap≥30 and importance≥6 and implementation<6) and strong barriers (≥6) were further analysed in multilevel logistic regression models. RESULTS: Overall, 26 and 31 countries provided data from 1873 patients and 1131 rheumatologists, respectively. 19 out of 20 SoCs were problematic from the perspectives of more than 20% of patients, while this was true for only 10 SoCs for rheumatologists. Rheumatologists in countries with lower gross domestic product and non-European Union countries were more likely to report problematic gaps in 15 of 20 SoCs, while virtually no differences were observed among patients. Lack of relevance of some SoCs (71%) and limited time of professionals (66%) were the most frequent implementation barriers identified by patients. CONCLUSIONS: Many problematic gaps were reported across several essential aspects of RA care. More efforts need to be devoted to implementation of EULAR SoCs.

15.
Joint Bone Spine ; : 105071, 2020 Sep 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32920168

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To explore the clinical and socio-demographic factors associated with Patient Acceptable Symptom Status (PASS) in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). METHODS: In a post-hoc analyses of a cross-sectional study, RA patients from 11 countries were included. PASS was assessed as acceptable/not acceptable status by the patient. Variables collected included socio-economic (gender, age and country gross domestic product (GDP) per capita) and clinical variables: DAS28-3vESR (28 joint counts and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate), the patient-reported Rheumatoid Arthritis Impact of Disease (RAID) score and its seven domains (scored 0 to 10). Patients in PASS or not were compared through univariable tests and factors associated with PASS assessed by multivariable forward conditional logistic regression. A similar analysis was performed in the subgroup patients in DAS28 remission (n=168). RESULTS: A total of 548 patients were included: 80.5% female, mean (±SD) age 55.8±12.8years, disease duration 13.6±10.6 years, DAS28 3.6±1.5. Overall, 360 (65.7%) considered themselves to be in PASS. Independent factors positively associated with being in PASS were age>50 years [odds ratio, OR 1.67; (95% confidence Interval: 1.04-2.67)], a lower DAS28 [OR: 1.28 (1.08-1.52)], lower pain [OR:1.45 (1.27-1.64)] and better emotional well-being [OR:1.28 (1.13-1.45)]. Among patients in remission, being in PASS was positively associated with less severe pain [OR: 2.50 (1.79-3.84)], age>50 years [OR 3.30 (1.03 to10.87)] and living in a country of the low GDP category [OR: 5.08; (1.34-19.23)]. CONCLUSIONS: Being in PASS is related to many factors besides disease activity, including age, perceived impact of the disease and national GDP.

17.
Ann Rheum Dis ; 79(10): 1269-1276, 2020 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32606042

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To explore whether trial population characteristics modify treatment responses across various interventions, comparators and rheumatic conditions. METHODS: In this meta-epidemiological study, we included trials from systematic reviews available from the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group published up to 23 April 2019 in Cochrane Library with meta-analyses of five or more randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published from year 2000. From trial reports, we extracted data on 20 population characteristics. For characteristics with sufficient data (ie, available for ≥2/3 of the trials), we performed multilevel meta-epidemiological analyses. RESULTS: We identified 19 eligible systematic reviews contributing 187 RCTs (212 comparisons). Only age and sex were explicitly reported in ≥2/3 of the trials. Using information about the country of the trials led to sufficient data for five further characteristics, that is, 7 out of 20 (35%) protocolised characteristics were analysed. The meta-regressions showed effect modification by economic status, place of residence, and, nearly, from healthcare system (explaining 4.8%, 0.9% and 1.5% of the between-trial variation, respectively). No effect modification was demonstrated from age, sex, patient education/health literacy or predominant religion. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the scarce reporting of most population characteristics, hampering investigation of their impact with meta-research. Our sparse results suggest that place of residence (ie, continent of the trial), economic status (based on World Bank classifications) and healthcare system (based on WHO index for health system performance) may be important in explaining the variation in treatment response across trials. There is an urgent need for consistent reporting of important population characteristics in trials. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019127642.


Assuntos
Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/métodos , Doenças Reumáticas/terapia , Resultado do Tratamento , Demografia , Humanos , Fatores Socioeconômicos
18.
Arthritis Res Ther ; 22(1): 177, 2020 07 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32711571

RESUMO

The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) has defined core sets for (i) symptom-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (SM-ARD), (ii) clinical record keeping, and (iii) disease-controlling anti-rheumatic therapy (DC-ART). These include the following domains for all three core sets: "physical function," "pain," "spinal mobility," "spinal stiffness," and "patient's global assessment" (PGA). The core set for clinical record keeping further includes the domains "peripheral joints/entheses" and "acute phase reactants," and the core set for DC-ART further includes the domains "fatigue" and "spine radiographs/hip radiographs." The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) endorsed the core sets in 1998.Using empirical evidence from axSpA trials, we investigated the efficacy (i.e., net benefit) according to the ASAS/OMERACT core outcome set for axSpA across all interventions tested in trials included in subsequent Cochrane reviews. For all continuous scales, we combined data using the standardized mean difference (SMD) to meta-analyze outcomes involving the same domains. Also, through meta-regression analysis, we examined the effect of the separate SMD measures (independent variables) on the primary endpoint (log [OR], dependent variable) across all trials.Based on 11 eligible Cochrane reviews, from these, 85 articles were screened; we included 43 trials with 63 randomized comparisons. Mean (SD) number of ASAS/OMERACT core outcome domains measured for SM-ARD/physical therapy trials was 4.2 (1.7). Six trials assessed all proposed domains. Mean (SD) for number of core outcome domains for DC-ART trials was 5.8 (1.7). No trials assessed all nine domains. Eight trials (16%) were judged to have inadequate (i.e., high risk of) selective outcome reporting bias. The most responsible core domains for achieving success in meeting the primary objective per trial were pain, OR (95% CI) 5.19 (2.28, 11.77), and PGA, OR (95% CI) 1.87 (1.14, 3.07). In conclusion, selective outcome reporting (and "missing data") should be reduced by encouraging the use of the endorsed ASAS/OMERACT outcome domains in clinical trials. Overall outcome reporting was good for SM-ARD/physical therapy trials and poor for DC-ART trials. Our findings suggest that both PGA and pain provide a valuable holistic construct for the assessment of improvement beyond more objective measures of spinal inflammation.

19.
J Rheumatol Suppl ; 96: 25-30, 2020 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32482764

RESUMO

At the 2019 Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis-Collaborative Research Network annual meeting, the group presented its progress in selecting a database platform; items to include in an electronic case report form (eCRF); and standardized operating procedures (SOP) for the collection, processing, storage, and transport of biomaterial. A pilot investigator-initiated study was also proposed that, in addition to addressing an area of unmet need, would allow for the testing of both the eCRF and SOP.

20.
J Rheumatol Suppl ; 96: 46-49, 2020 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32482768

RESUMO

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) working group provided updates at the 2019 GRAPPA annual meeting on its work toward developing a core outcome set for PsA. The working group prioritized 4 domains, including musculoskeletal disease activity (enthesitis and dactylitis), fatigue, physical function, and structural damage. In this report, the working group summarizes its progress in standardizing the core outcome set for these 4 domains.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA