-
Arthritis Care & Research Apr 2022To provide updated guidelines for pharmacologic management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), focusing on treatment of oligoarthritis, temporomandibular joint (TMJ)...
2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Therapeutic Approaches for Oligoarthritis, Temporomandibular Joint Arthritis, and Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis.
OBJECTIVE
To provide updated guidelines for pharmacologic management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), focusing on treatment of oligoarthritis, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthritis, and systemic JIA with and without macrophage activation syndrome. Recommendations regarding tapering and discontinuing treatment in inactive systemic JIA are also provided.
METHODS
We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.
RESULTS
Similar to those published in 2019, these JIA recommendations are based on clinical phenotypes of JIA, rather than a specific classification schema. This guideline provides recommendations for initial and subsequent treatment of JIA with oligoarthritis, TMJ arthritis, and systemic JIA as well as for tapering and discontinuing treatment in subjects with inactive systemic JIA. Other aspects of disease management, including factors that influence treatment choice and medication tapering, are discussed. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional.
CONCLUSION
This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver.
Topics: Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Juvenile; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Quality of Life; Rheumatology; Temporomandibular Joint; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders; United States; Uveitis
PubMed: 35233986
DOI: 10.1002/acr.24853 -
Arthritis & Rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.) Apr 2022To provide updated guidelines for pharmacologic management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), focusing on treatment of oligoarthritis, temporomandibular joint (TMJ)...
2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Therapeutic Approaches for Oligoarthritis, Temporomandibular Joint Arthritis, and Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis.
OBJECTIVE
To provide updated guidelines for pharmacologic management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), focusing on treatment of oligoarthritis, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthritis, and systemic JIA with and without macrophage activation syndrome. Recommendations regarding tapering and discontinuing treatment in inactive systemic JIA are also provided.
METHODS
We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.
RESULTS
Similar to those published in 2019, these JIA recommendations are based on clinical phenotypes of JIA, rather than a specific classification schema. This guideline provides recommendations for initial and subsequent treatment of JIA with oligoarthritis, TMJ arthritis, and systemic JIA as well as for tapering and discontinuing treatment in subjects with inactive systemic JIA. Other aspects of disease management, including factors that influence treatment choice and medication tapering, are discussed. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional.
CONCLUSION
This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver.
Topics: Arthritis, Juvenile; Humans; Quality of Life; Rheumatology; Temporomandibular Joint; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders; United States; Uveitis
PubMed: 35233993
DOI: 10.1002/art.42037 -
Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 2021To summarise the epidemiology, risk and prognostic factors, and treatment landscape of rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD). (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To summarise the epidemiology, risk and prognostic factors, and treatment landscape of rheumatoid arthritis-associated interstitial lung disease (RA-ILD).
METHODS
Targeted and systematic literature reviews were conducted to characterise the epidemiology and treatment landscape associated with RA-ILD, respectively. MEDLINE®, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched via OvidSP in March 2019 and December 2018. The results were narratively summarised.
RESULTS
A total of 24 and 20 publications were captured through targeted and systematic literature review, respectively. No randomised controlled trials were identified; publications were observational cohort studies, cross-sectional, or case-control. Unadjusted incidence of interstitial lung disease (ILD) ranged from 1.3/1,000 person-years for interstitial pneumonia-type ILD to 5.0/1,000 person-years for 'probable or definite ILD'. Prevalence of ILD ranged from 1.8% to 67% (median: 24.9%) and varied with case definition and sample size. Few publications identified the same risk and prognostic factors; age, male sex, duration of disease, and antibodies to cyclic citrullinated peptides were the most frequently reported risk factors for development of RA-ILD, and age was the most common predictor of mortality. Despite identification of a variety of pharmacotherapeutic interventions, assessment of the comparative efficacy and safety of the available treatments were difficult due to heterogenous reporting of outcomes and small sample size.
CONCLUSIONS
A wide range of estimates were identified for incidence and prevalence of RA-ILD. Further, there was no consensus on risk and prognostic factors. Sufficiently powered clinical trials are needed to confirm the findings of the observational studies with respect to efficacy and safety of current treatments.
Topics: Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Cross-Sectional Studies; Humans; Lung Diseases, Interstitial; Male; Prognosis; Risk Factors
PubMed: 33635222
DOI: 10.55563/clinexprheumatol/h9tc57 -
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases Jan 2023To perform a systematic literature review (SLR) concerning the safety of synthetic(s) and biological (b) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) to inform the... (Review)
Review
Safety of synthetic and biological DMARDs: a systematic literature review informing the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis.
OBJECTIVES
To perform a systematic literature review (SLR) concerning the safety of synthetic(s) and biological (b) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) to inform the 2022 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
METHODS
SLR of observational studies comparing safety outcomes of any DMARD with another intervention in RA. A comparator group was required for inclusion. For treatments yet without, or limited, registry data, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were used.
RESULTS
Fifty-nine observational studies addressed the safety of DMARDs. Two studies (unclear risk of bias (RoB)) showed an increased risk of serious infections with bDMARDs compared with conventional synthetic (cs)DMARDs. Herpes zoster infections occurred more with JAKi than csDMARDs (adjusted HR (aHR): 3.66) and bDMARDs (aHR: 1.9-2.3) (four studies, two low RoB). The risk of malignancies was similar across bDMARDs (five studies) and with tofacitinib compared with bDMARDs (one study, low RoB). The risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was similar with bDMARDs and tofacitinib (two studies, one low RoB). Thirty studies reported safety from RCTs, with one, designed to evaluate safety, showing that malignancies (HR (95% CI): 1.48 (1.04 to 2.09)) and MACE (HR (95% CI): 1.33 (0.91 to 1.94)) occurred numerically more frequently with tofacitinib (5 mg and 10 mg doses combined) than with TNFi in patients with cardiovascular risk factors. In this study, the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) was higher with tofacitinib 10 mg than with TNFi.
CONCLUSION
The safety profile of bDMARDs was further demonstrated. Whether the difference in incidence of malignancies, MACE and VTE between tofacitinib and TNFi applies to other JAKi needs further evaluation.
Topics: Humans; Venous Thromboembolism; Biological Products; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Neoplasms
PubMed: 36376026
DOI: 10.1136/ard-2022-223357 -
Autoimmunity Reviews Sep 2020"Rhupus" or "rhupus syndrome" is a poorly described and underdiagnosed disease in which features of both rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)...
"Rhupus" or "rhupus syndrome" is a poorly described and underdiagnosed disease in which features of both rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) appear in the same patient, most often sequentially. The SLE-related involvement is usually mild, dominated by hematological abnormalities and skin, serosal and renal involvement. The natural history of rhupus arthritis follows an RA-like pattern and can progress towards typical inflammatory erosions, deformations and disability. Despite the lack of consensus on the definition of rhupus and on its place in the spectrum of autoimmunity, a growing number of studies are pointing towards a true overlap between RA and SLE. However, the inclusion criteria employed in the literature during the last 4 decades are heterogeneous, making the already rare cohorts and case reports difficult to analyze. Because of this heterogeneity and due to the rarity of the disease, the prevalence, pathophysiology and natural history as well as the radiological and immunological profiles of rhupus are poorly described. Moreover, since there is no validated therapeutic strategy, treatment is based on clinicians' experience and on the results of a few studies. We herein present a systematic literature review to analyze the clinical and laboratory data of all reported rhupus patients and to provide up-to-date information about recent advances in the understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms, diagnostic tools and treatment options.
Topics: Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Humans; Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic; Prevalence; Syndrome
PubMed: 32668290
DOI: 10.1016/j.autrev.2020.102612 -
The Journal of Rheumatology May 2021To estimate the prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from international population-based studies and investigate the influence of prevalence definition, data sources,...
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from international population-based studies and investigate the influence of prevalence definition, data sources, classification criteria, and geographical area on RA prevalence.
METHODS
A search of ProQuest, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE was undertaken to identify population-based studies investigating RA prevalence between 1980 and 2019. Studies were reviewed using the Joanna Briggs Institute approach for the systematic review and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
RESULTS
Sixty studies met the inclusion criteria. There was a wide range of point prevalence reported (0.00-2.70%) with a mean of 0.56% (SD 0.51) between 1986 and 2014, and a mean period prevalence of 0.51% (SD 0.35) between 1955 and 2015. RA point and period prevalence was higher in urban settings (0.69% vs 0.48%) than in rural settings (0.54% vs 0.25%). An RA diagnosis validated by rheumatologists yielded the highest period prevalence of RA and was observed in linked databases (0.80%, SD 0.1).
CONCLUSION
The literature reports a wide range of point and period prevalence based on population and method of data collection, but average point and period prevalence of RA were 51 in 10,000 and 56 in 10,000, respectively. Higher urban vs rural prevalence may be biased due to poor case findings in areas with less healthcare or differences in risk environment. The population database studies were more consistent than sampling studies, and linked databases in different continents appeared to provide a consistent estimate of RA period prevalence, confirming the high value of rheumatologist diagnosis as classification criteria.
Topics: Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Databases, Factual; Humans; Prevalence; Rheumatologists; Rural Population
PubMed: 33060323
DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.200367 -
Nutrition Reviews Mar 2021The impact of various dietary interventions on rheumatoid arthritis (RA), characterized by immune-inflammatory response, has been subject to increased attention.
CONTEXT
The impact of various dietary interventions on rheumatoid arthritis (RA), characterized by immune-inflammatory response, has been subject to increased attention.
OBJECTIVE
A systematic review was conducted to update the current knowledge on the effects of nutritional, dietary supplement, and fasting interventions on RA outcomes.
DATA SOURCES
Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, with prespecification of all methods, Medline and Embase were systematically searched for relevant articles.
DATA EXTRACTION
Data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers.
RESULTS
A total of 70 human studies were identified. Administration of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids at high doses resulted in a reduction in RA disease activity and a lower failure rate of pharmacotherapy. Vitamin D supplementation and dietary sodium restriction were beneficial on some RA outcomes. Fasting resulted in significant but transient subjective improvements. While the Mediterranean diet demonstrated improvements in some RA disease activity measures, outcomes from vegetarian, elimination, peptide, or elemental diets suggested that responses are very individualized.
CONCLUSION
Some dietary approaches may improve RA symptoms and thus it is recommended that nutrition should be routinely addressed.
Topics: Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Clinical Trials as Topic; Dietary Supplements; Humans
PubMed: 32585000
DOI: 10.1093/nutrit/nuaa033 -
International Ophthalmology Feb 2022To provide an overview of the ocular features of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and of the ophthalmic adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that may be associated with the... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To provide an overview of the ocular features of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and of the ophthalmic adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that may be associated with the administration of antirheumatic drugs.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed using the PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases. In addition, a cohort of 489 RA patients who attended the Authors' departments were examined.
RESULTS
Keratoconjunctivitis sicca, episcleritis, scleritis, peripheral ulcerative keratitis (PUK), and anterior uveitis were diagnosed in 29%, 6%, 5%, 2%, and 10%, respectively, of the mentioned cohort. Ocular ADRs to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are rarely reported and include subconjunctival hemorrhages and hemorrhagic retinopathy. In patients taking indomethacin, whorl-like corneal deposits and pigmentary retinopathy have been observed. Glucocorticoids are frequently responsible for posterior subcapsular cataracts and open-angle glaucoma. Methotrexate, the prototype of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), has been associated with the onset of ischemic optic neuropathy, retinal cotton-wool spots, and orbital non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Mild cystoid macular edema and punctate keratitis in patients treated with leflunomide have been occasionally reported. The most frequently occurring ADR of hydroxychloroquine is vortex keratopathy, which may progress to "bull's eye" maculopathy. Patients taking tofacitinib, a synthetic DMARD, more frequently suffer herpes zoster virus (HZV) reactivation, including ophthalmic HZ. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors have been associated with the paradoxical onset or recurrence of uveitis or sarcoidosis, as well as optic neuritis, demyelinating optic neuropathy, chiasmopathy, and oculomotor palsy. Recurrent episodes of PUK, multiple cotton-wool spots, and retinal hemorrhages have occasionally been reported in patients given tocilizumab, that may also be associated with HZV reactivation, possibly involving the eye. Finally, rituximab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, has rarely been associated with necrotizing scleritis, macular edema, and visual impairment.
CONCLUSION
The level of evidence for most of the drug reactions described herein is restricted to the "likely" or "possible" rather than to the "certain" category. However, the lack of biomarkers indicative of the potential risk of ocular ADRs hinders their prevention and emphasizes the need for an accurate risk vs. benefit assessment of these therapies for each patient.
Topics: Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Glaucoma, Open-Angle; Humans; Iatrogenic Disease; Rituximab
PubMed: 34802085
DOI: 10.1007/s10792-021-02058-8 -
Archives of Physical Medicine and... Jan 2021To present recent evidence on the prevalence, incidence, costs, activity limitations, and work limitations of common conditions requiring rehabilitation.
A Systematic Review of the Incidence, Prevalence, Costs, and Activity and Work Limitations of Amputation, Osteoarthritis, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Back Pain, Multiple Sclerosis, Spinal Cord Injury, Stroke, and Traumatic Brain Injury in the United States: A 2019 Update.
OBJECTIVES
To present recent evidence on the prevalence, incidence, costs, activity limitations, and work limitations of common conditions requiring rehabilitation.
DATA SOURCES
Medline (PubMed), SCOPUS, Web of Science, and the gray literature were searched for relevant articles about amputation, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, back pain, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, stroke, and traumatic brain injury.
STUDY SELECTION
Relevant articles (N=106) were included.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two investigators independently reviewed articles and selected relevant articles for inclusion. Quality grading was performed using the Methodological Evaluation of Observational Research Checklist and Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form.
DATA SYNTHESIS
The prevalence of back pain in the past 3 months was 33.9% among community-dwelling adults, and patients with back pain contribute $365 billion in all-cause medical costs. Osteoarthritis is the next most prevalent condition (approximately 10.4%), and patients with this condition contribute $460 billion in all-cause medical costs. These 2 conditions are the most prevalent and costly (medically) of the illnesses explored in this study. Stroke follows these conditions in both prevalence (2.5%-3.7%) and medical costs ($28 billion). Other conditions may have a lower prevalence but are associated with relatively higher per capita effects.
CONCLUSIONS
Consistent with previous findings, back pain and osteoarthritis are the most prevalent conditions with high aggregate medical costs. By contrast, other conditions have a lower prevalence or cost but relatively higher per capita costs and effects on activity and work. The data are extremely heterogeneous, which makes anything beyond broad comparisons challenging. Additional information is needed to determine the relative impact of each condition.
Topics: Absenteeism; Amputation, Surgical; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Back Pain; Brain Injuries, Traumatic; Health Expenditures; Humans; Incidence; Multiple Sclerosis; Osteoarthritis; Physical Functional Performance; Prevalence; Spinal Cord Injuries; United States
PubMed: 32339483
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.04.001 -
Clinical Rheumatology Sep 2023Systematic r eview to evaluate the quality of the clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management and to provide a synthesis of high-quality... (Review)
Review
Systematic r eview to evaluate the quality of the clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management and to provide a synthesis of high-quality CPG recommendations, highlighting areas of consistency, and inconsistency. Electronic searches of five databases and four online guideline repositories were performed. RA management CPGs were eligible for inclusion if they were written in English and published between January 2015 and February 2022; focused on adults ≥ 18 years of age; met the criteria of a CPG as defined by the Institute of Medicine; and were rated as high quality on the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument. RA CPGs were excluded if they required additional payment to access; only addressed recommendations for the system/organization of care and did not include interventional management recommendations; and/or included other arthritic conditions. Of 27 CPGs identified, 13 CPGs met eligibility criteria and were included. Non-pharmacological care should include patient education, patient-centered care, shared decision-making, exercise, orthoses, and a multi-disciplinary approach to care. Pharmacological care should include conventional synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), with methotrexate as the first-line choice. If monotherapy conventional synthetic DMARDs fail to achieve a treatment target, this should be followed by combination therapy conventional synthetic DMARDs (leflunomide, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine), biologic DMARDS and targeted synthetic DMARDS. Management should also include monitoring, pre-treatment investigations and vaccinations, and screening for tuberculosis and hepatitis. Surgical care should be recommended if non-surgical care fails. This synthesis offers clear guidance of evidence-based RA care to healthcare providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this review was registered with Open Science Framework ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/UB3Y7 ).
Topics: Adult; Humans; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Hydroxychloroquine; Methotrexate; Sulfasalazine; Practice Guidelines as Topic
PubMed: 37291382
DOI: 10.1007/s10067-023-06654-0