A Randomized Control Trial of Dexketoprofen/Vitamin B (Thiamine, Pyridoxine and Cyanocobalamin) Fixed-Dose Combination in Post-Traumatic Grade I-II Cervical Sprains.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal disorders are an important cause of work absence. Clinical practice guidelines recommend nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for grade I-II cervical sprains. The combination of thiamine + pyridoxine + cyanocobalamin vitamins has been used, alone and in combination with NSAIDs, for pain and inflammation in musculoskeletal disorders. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to demonstrate the analgesic synergy of dexketoprofen, and the combination of vitamins thiamine + pyridoxine + cyanocobalamin in a fixed-dose combination (FDC) for the treatment of acute pain caused by grade I-II cervical sprains. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, prospective, randomized, double-blind, phase IIIb clinical study comparing two treatment groups: (1) dexketoprofen 25 mg/vitamin B (thiamine 100 mg, pyridoxine 50 mg and cyanocobalamin 0.50 mg) in an FDC (two or more active ingredients combined in a single dosage form) versus (2) dexketoprofen 25 mg monotherapy (single drug to treat a particular disease), one capsule or tablet orally, every 8 h for 7 days. Final mean, average change, and percentage change in pain perception (measured using a visual analogue scale [VAS]) were compared with baseline between groups. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Analyses were conducted using SPSS software, v.29.0. RESULTS: A statistically significant reduction in pain intensity was observed from the third day of treatment with the FDC compared with monotherapy (- 3.1 ± - 1.5 and - 2.6 ± - 1.1 cm, respectively) measured using the VAS (p = 0.011). Regarding the degree of disability, using the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ), statistical difference was observed for the final measurement (7.5%, interquartile range [IQR] 2.5, 10.5; vs. 7.9%, IQR 5.0, 13.8; p = 0.028). A lower proportion of adverse events was reported when using the FDC. CONCLUSIONS: The FDC of dexketoprofen/thiamine + pyridoxine + cyanocobalamin vitamins demonstrated superior efficacy and a better safety profile compared with dexketoprofen monotherapy for pain treatment in patients with grade I-II cervical sprains. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT05001555, registered 29 July 2021 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05001555 ).

Multimodal Analgesia Approach in Acute Low Back Pain Management: A Phase III Study of a Novel Analgesic Combination of Etoricoxib/Tramadol.

INTRODUCTION: Pain and disability management are crucial for a speedy recovery. Combining analgesics with different mechanisms of action provides greater pain relief with lower doses, promoting efficient multimodal analgesia. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety between two fixed-dose combinations (FDC): etoricoxib/tramadol compared to paracetamol/tramadol for the management of acute low back pain (LBP) in a 7-day treatment. METHODS: We conducted a phase IIIb, prospective, randomized, and multicenter study in patients with acute LBP treated with etoricoxib 90 mg/tramadol 50 mg (one packet of granules diluted in 100 ml of water, once a day [QD], for 7 days) or paracetamol 975 mg/tramadol 112.5 mg (one tablet of 325 mg/37.5 mg, three times a day [TID], for 7 days) to assess the efficacy (in terms of pain and disability improvement) and safety. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-four patients were randomized to receive either etoricoxib/tramadol QD (n = 61) or paracetamol/tramadol TID (n = 63). From the magnitude of change in pain evaluations, differences were observed between the treatment groups at 3 [p = 0.054, CI 95% - 0.648 (- 0.010 to 1.306)] and 5 days (p = 0.041). The proportion of patients with a 30% reduction in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score was statistically significant when comparing the treatment groups on the third day of follow-up [p = 0.008, CI 95% 0.241 (0.061-0.421)]. An improvement in LBP's disability to perform activities of daily routine (Oswestry and Roland-Morris questionnaires) was observed in both treatment groups. A total of 79 adverse events (AEs) (38 [48.1%] with etoricoxib/tramadol and 41 [51.9%] with paracetamol/tramadol) were reported. The most frequent AEs were nausea (17.7%) and dizziness (16.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The results show the clinical benefits of etoricoxib/tramadol FDC, such as the sparing effect of tramadol dose per day, early therapeutic response rate compared with paracetamol/tramadol; which translates into faster pain relief, better adherence, less tramadol drug dependency, and a reduction of related AEs incidence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04968158.

Not the same, but is it the same? Cycling of biologic agents in rheumatoid arthritis. Experience in the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social.

INTRODUCTION: Available data for biocomparable drugs are not enough to make clear decisions with respect to the potential consequences of a change for non-medical reasons in efficacy, security and inmunogenicity in patients. In the near future, options on biological treatments, biocomparable drugs, non biocomparable drugs and new chemical synthesis options will grow. Therefore, it is important to know how patients behave in persistence of treatment after a change for non- medical reasons, which already happens on a regular basis in social security institutions in Mexico. This information will help us to better understand the standard of treatment for patients with chronic immunomediated conditions. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to measure the impact of change for non-medical reasons in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with an innovative biological on persistence of treatment after changing to a biocomparable drug or a non-biocomparable drug, compared with those patients staying with the innovative biological. STUDY DESIGN: This is an observational study (non-interventionist) of paired cohorts, where an historic cohort obtained by review of clinical records of stable patients in which no modifications to treatment were made for at least six months is compared with two cohorts of patients whose treatments were switched to another treatment with the same therapeutic mechanism for-non-medical reasons (cycling). RESULTS: We included 264 RA patients (ACR/EULAR, 2010); 132 were switched for non-medical reasons, and 132 were not switched. Two-hundred and thirty (87.1%) were female. Average age was 53.9 years, ranging from 16 to 84 years. Two-hundred and sixty-three patients were Latino (99.6%); one was Caucasian. Persistence of treatment 12 months after the change was 84.8% (85.8% in Enbrel/Infinitam, 78.9% for Remicade/Remsima). No statistical difference was found with respect to RA clinical activity measured by DAS28 12 months after the switch (P > .05). In the 134 switched patients, 20 discontinued the new treatment due to lack of efficacy of the new drug and were changed to a different drug with a different biologic target. Although no differences were found in the cohorts of switched patients with respect to DAS 28 after 12 months of use, we did find differences in the frequency of adverse events. Forty-two patients had an adverse event in the drug switch cohorts: 33 in the Enbrel-Infinitam group and 9 in the Remicade-Remsima group. CONCLUSIONS: The persistence of treatment after switching from an innovative drug to a biocomparable or a non- biocomparable in RA patients did not show statistically significative differences in our cohorts, but we did find a higher number of adverse events when comparing those who were changed with those who continued on an innovative drug. Twenty patients in the switch groups had to receive a new drug with a different biological target due to lack of efficacy of the switched drug.

Prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine despite limited perceived efficacy in patients with rheumatic diseases in Mexico: Cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is frequently used by patients with rheumatic diseases (RD) to improve their symptoms; however, its diversity and availability have increased notably while scientific support for its effectiveness and adverse effects is still scarce. OBJECTIVE: To describe the prevalence and diversity of CAM in patients with RD in Chihuahua, Mexico. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 500 patients with RD who were interviewed about the use of CAM to treat their disease. The interview included sociodemographic aspects, characteristics of the disease, as well as a description of CAM use, including type, frequency of use, perception of the benefit, communication with the rheumatologist, among others. RESULTS: The prevalence of CAM use was reported by 59.2% of patients, which informed a total of 155 different therapies. The herbal CAM group was the most used (31.4%) and included more than 50 different therapies. The use of menthol-based and arnica ointments was highly prevalent (35%). Most patients (62.3%) reported very little or no improvement in their symptoms. Only a fourth of the patients informed the rheumatologist of the use of CAM. The use of CAM was influenced by female sex, university degree, diagnosis delay, lack adherence to the rheumatologist's treatment, family history of RD, and orthopedic devices. CONCLUSION: The use of CAM in our population is highly prevalent and similar to reports in different populations suggesting a widespread use in many different societies. We found high use of herbal remedies; however, there were many different types suggesting a lack of significant effect. Patients continue using CAM despite a perception of no-effectiveness. Recurrent use of CAM is explained by factors other than its efficacy.

Not the same, but ¿is it the same? Cycling of biologic agents in rheumatoid arthritis. Experience in the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social. / No es el mismo pero ¿es igual? Cycling de agentes biológicos en artritis reumatoide. Experiencia en el Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social.

INTRODUCTION: Available data for biocomparable drugs are not enough to make clear decisions with respect to the potential consequences of a change for non-medical reasons in efficacy, security and inmunogenicity in patients. In the near future, options on biological treatments, biocomparable drugs, non biocomparable drugs and new chemical synthesis options will grow. Therefore, it is important to know how patients behave in persistence of treatment after a change for non-medical reasons, which already happens on a regular basis in social security institutions in Mexico. This information will help us to better understand the standard of treatment for patients with chronic immunomediated conditions. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to measure the impact of change for non-medical reasons in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with an innovative biological on persistence of treatment after changing to a biocomparable drug or a non-biocomparable drug, compared with those patients staying with the innovative biological. STUDY DESIGN: This is an observational study (non-interventionist) of paired cohorts, where an historic cohort obtained by review of clinical records of stable patients in which no modifications to treatment were made for at least six months is compared with two cohorts of patients whose treatments were switched to another treatment with the same therapeutic mechanism for-non-medical reasons (cycling). RESULTS: We included 264 RA patients (ACR/EULAR, 2010); 132 were switched for non-medical reasons, and 132 were not switched. Two-hundred and thirty (87.1%) were female. Average age was 53.9years, ranging from 16 to 84years. Two-hundred and sixty-three patients were Latino (99.6%); one was Caucasian. Persistence of treatment 12months after the change was 84.8% (85.8% in Enbrel/Infinitam, 78.9% for Remicade/Remsima). No statistical difference was found with respect to RA clinical activity measured by DAS28 12months after the switch (P>.05). In the 134 switched patients, 20 discontinued the new treatment due to lack of efficacy of the new drug and were changed to a different drug with a different biologic target. Although no differences were found in the cohorts of switched patients with respect to DAS28 after 12months of use, we did find differences in the frequency of adverse events. Forty-two patients had an adverse event in the drug switch cohorts: 33 in the Enbrel-Infinitam group and 9 in the Remicade-Remsima group. CONCLUSIONS: The persistence of treatment after switching from an innovative drug to a biocomparable or a non-biocomparable in RA patients did not show statistically significative differences in our cohorts, but we did find a higher number of adverse events when comparing those who were changed with those who continued on an innovative drug. Twenty patients in the switch groups had to receive a new drug with a different biological target due to lack of efficacy of the switched drug.

[Efficacy of rituximab versus cyclophosphamide in lupus patients with severe manifestations. A randomized and multicenter study]. / Eficacia de rituximab comparado con ciclofosfamida en pacientes con manifestaciones graves de lupus eritematoso generalizado. Estudio aleatorizado y multicéntrico.

UNLABELLED: There are no controlled studies that compare the efficacy of RTX with standard treatment, such as cyclophosphamide, in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of rituximab to that of cyclophosphamide in patients with severe manifestations of SLE. MATERIALS AND METHOD: This is a multicenter, randomized open and controlled trial in adults with a diagnosis of active SLE. Patients were randomized into two groups; group 1: treated with RTX and group 2: cyclophosphamide pulses with the same steroid scheme. We registered MEX-SLEDAI, steroid requirements and adverse events for 12 months. Descriptive and comparative statistic analysis was performed. RESULTS: 19 patients were included, 17 females, mean age 35.7±12.1 years and duration of disease 5.6 years (range 0.35 to 30.8 years). There were no differences at baseline regarding gender, age, duration of disease, previous treatments or disease activity between both groups. MEX-SLEDAI was reduced from 12 to 3 in group 1 and from 9 to 2 in group 2 (p=0.80). Nevertheless, patients treated with RTX had a faster improvement. There was no difference in the cumulative steroid dose. Both groups had significant reduction in antinuclear antibody levels and similar increase in C3 levels. Adverse events were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: This comparative clinical study in patients with SLE shows that rituximab can be as useful as cyclophosphamide for severe manifestations, maybe showing a faster response. Adverse events were no different. Rituximab should be considered as an adequate alternative for this group of patients.

Reemplazo total de rodilla. Experiencia de quince años en un servicio de reumatologia / Total knee replacement. Experience of 15 years in a rheumatology service

Se analizó la experiencia obtenida en 45 pacientes del Servicio de Reumatología a quienes se les colocaron 58 prótesis totales de rodilla durante el período 1980-1995. La enfermedad más frecuente fue la artritis reumatoide en el 73 por ciento de los casos con promedio de 5 años de permanencia de la prótesis. La frecuencia de complicaciones fue 11 por ciento, predominando las infecciones con 7 por ciento (IC 95 por ciento 0-44 13.56). Los resultados obtenidos corresponden a lo mencionado en la literatura; sin embargo, llamó la atención la frecuencia de las complicaciones infecciosas, por lo que se recomiendan algunas medidas encaminadas a disminuirlas