Open Access Rheumatology-Research and Reviews最新文献

Introduction: Osteoporosis (OP) is one of the most common comorbidities associated with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Literatures reported that the risk for developing OP was strongly associated with duration and severity of RA. We aim to elaborate on the consequences of OP on disease activity and management plan in patients with RA.

Patients and methods: A retrospective cohort study recruited 408 patients, including those with RA alone and with RA plus OP. The RA disease activity in the patients was assessed using disease activity score in 28 joints (DAS28-CRP). A statistical analysis was performed to compare data between the two groups of patients and determine any significant risk factor associated with the development of OP in RA patients.

Results: Of 408 patients who were included in this study, 353 patients (86.5%) had only RA, while 55 patients (13.5%) had RA with OP and showed significant difference (P = 0.04) concerning age categories. Patients diagnosed with RA and OP had RA duration longer than RA-only patients (independent t-test, P = 0.01). The two groups had almost similar disease activity at the three clinical visits, as well, had nearly similar disability at their first visit, whereas RA with OP patients had significant greater disability at their 2^nd and 3^rd visits (independent t-test, P = 0.001). Both groups were treated with the same biologic and non-biologic medication of similar frequency, although RA patients with OP received steroid more frequently than patients had RA only (61.7% vs. 41.7%, chi square test, P = 0.03).

Conclusion: There was no significant difference in disease activity at both groups of patients. However, RA with OP group had longer duration of RA, were more frequently treated with steroids, and had greater disability. We recommend physicians focus on controlling RA disease activity, early screening for and treating of OP.

Introduction: Systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (sJIA) is a rare, complex autoinflammatory disease with substantial morbidity, often characterized by fever, rash, and muscle pain, amongst other symptoms. Biologic agents, such as anakinra, have been successfully used to treat patients internationally, but their usage in some regions is limited to patients that have failed to achieve clinically inactive disease with corticosteroids and conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). Use of anakinra early in the disease course leads to better clinical outcomes; however, longer-term costs for this treatment strategy have not been established. This study compares the economic implications of first-line versus later-line availability of anakinra for patients with sJIA.

Methods: Data for patients treated with first-line anakinra were identified from a single-center, prospective study and compared to a combination of published trial and economic evaluation information to facilitate a comparison to later-line anakinra (ie, following corticosteroids + csDMARDs). Costs were estimated for product acquisition and medical resource utilization (MRU), including planned outpatient visits and unplanned hospital admissions. Total costs over a 5-year horizon were compared.

Results: Total 5-year product acquisition cost for the first-line anakinra strategy was €24,021, and for later-line anakinra was €20,471. The corresponding MRU costs were €19,197 (first-line) versus €25,425 (later-line). Overall 5-year costs (product acquisition and MRU) were lower for the first-line strategy (€43,218 versus €45,896).

Conclusion: The use of anakinra for patients with sJIA in the first-line setting is efficacious to induce and sustain inactive disease, and the findings of this study show that this treatment strategy leads to cost savings through reduced medical expenditure.

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune inflammatory disorder, which is associated with increased pro-inflammatory mediators to induce an elevation in acute-phase response, migration of immune cells and swelling of synovial joints. Evaluation of the level of C-reactive protein and associated risk factors in RA patients was the main aim of this study. Identifying the association between disease activity of RA (hsCRP) and socio-demographic characteristics was another aim of the study.

Methods: Institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted at the Rheumatology Clinic of Tikur Anbessa Specialized Hospital. In this study, the level of hsCRP was measured in both case and control groups. Simple descriptive statistics, multivariate analysis, independent sample t-test were utilized for statistical analysis. The strength of association between different risk factors and hsCRP was measured using odds ratio and 95% confidence interval. P-value < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

Result: The result of this study showed that the hsCRP level was significantly higher among RA patients as compared to the control groups (P-value = 0.004). There was an association between smoking and high disease activity status (AOR= 20.03, p= 0.40). Low economic status had a statistically significant association with high hsCRP level (AOR = 12.79, p=0.00). In this study, 42 RA patients had >3mg/l hsCRP level with different occupational exposures. On the other hand, 31 RA patients had <3mg/l hsCRP level among different exposures. Although there was no statistically significant association, the association between associated risk factors (oil consumption, physical exercise, educational status) and disease activity was computed in this study.

Conclusion: The inflammatory marker, hsCRP was significantly higher among patients as compared to controls. The higher hsCRP showed a high grade of systemic inflammation in RA patients. C-reactive protein was elevated in rheumatoid factor positive patients and patients with high BMI value. Additionally, the result of our study showed that different socio-economic factors had an association with disease activity of RA.

Purpose: To study the pattern of response to different treatment strategies in seropositive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and to describe our clinical practice in RA management.

Patients and methods: Over a period of two years from April 2018 to April 2020, we conducted a retrospective analysis of data for 288 consecutive seropositive RA patients attending rheumatology clinics and the daycare unit at Aseer Central Hospital. Data were collected on patient demographics, disease duration, extraarticular manifestations, comorbidities and treatment. Disease activity was assessed using the clinical disease activity index (CDAI).

Results: Out of the total 288 patients, 42% (120) are on csDMRADs, while 54% (162) are on bDMRADs and 4% (6) are on tsDMARDs. Of the patients on csDMARDS, 51%, 43% and 7% of them were on remission, low and moderate disease activity, respectively. However, of the patients on non-csDMARDS, 36.3%, 49.4% and 14.3% of them were on remission, low and moderate disease activity, respectively. Failure of csDMARDs was affected by the presence of high disease activity at baseline, extraarticular lung manifestations and coexistent fibromyalgia, with a significant effect of the latter on remission rate. Among patients on non-csDMARDs, 42 (25%) showed one or more therapy changes. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors were the predominant first-line agents in biologically naive patients (65%) followed by abatacept (18%). Abatacept was the most frequently prescribed second biologic in 52% of cases followed by tocilizumab in 19%.

Conclusion: The current clinical practice in our hospital is consistent with the latest American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) guidelines. Treat-to-target strategy was achieved in the vast majority of our patients, while remission was observed in almost half of the patients.

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor indicated for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The efficacy and safety/tolerability of tofacitinib have been extensively evaluated as monotherapy and combination therapy in multiple, randomised, multicentre studies in patients with RA. Tofacitinib as monotherapy (as first- and second-line treatment) or as combination with methotrexate (MTX) or other csDMARDs as second- and third-line treatment is effective and generally well tolerated in patients with RA. This article focuses on recent real-world evidence investigating the effectiveness, treatment persistence and safety/tolerability of tofacitinib in patients with RA. With this purpose, a literature review was conducted from April 2018 up to October 2020 for the effectiveness, persistence and safety of tofacitinib for the treatment of RA, primarily focusing on real-world studies. These retrospective and prospective and observational studies demonstrate the effectiveness of tofacitinib, thus supporting pivotal data from the clinical trial programme. Treatment persistence was generally comparable to that of biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Safety findings in these observational studies were consistent with the known safety profile of the approved dose of 5 mg twice daily.

Background: Anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibodies-associated vasculitis (AAV) is a rare autoimmune condition with high-relapsing rate and incidence of complications, resulting in increased morbidity and mortality. Characters of patients with anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibodies-associated vasculitis in Saudi Arabia require further exploration.

Objective: To evaluate the clinical profile, relapse rate and disease-related complications among patients with AAV at a tertiary hospital in Saudi Arabia. To estimate the role of BVAS score at the time of presentation in predicting relapse during the disease course.

Design and setting: This retrospective cohort study was performed through data collection from patients' records who had AAV, who visited the rheumatology clinic. The collected data involved the demographics of patients and their investigations, medications, and outcomes of treatment. Statistical analysis was executed through SPSS version 26.

Results: Fifty-two patients were eligible for inclusion, while 48 patients were analyzed because of missing data. Females represented 60.4%. Half of the patients were more than 50 years old, and 68.8% had comorbidities. As for diagnosis, 62.5% had granulomatosis with polyangiitis, 25% had eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, and 12.5% had microscopic polyangiitis. The rate of relapse was 31.3%, while the remission rate was 68.8%. Additionally, 66.7% had lower respiratory involvement, and 43.8% had renal involvement. More than half of the patients had BVAS score below 14.5 points. The study did not explore a positive correlation between the disease relapse and high BVAS at the first presentation.

Conclusion: Early prediction of relapse and such intervention is of paramount importance in order to avoid accrual of organ damage with treatments that prevent further relapses. BVAS score was not found to be a potential predictor in our study. Future studies are highly endorsed, with prospective design and large sample size to achieve statistical significance for the incidence of relapses and complications.

Objective: This study was conducted to estimate the frequency of anti-nuclear antibodies (ANAs), anti-dsDNA, and anti-extractable nuclear antigen (ENA) antibodies in juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus (JSLE) patients and their association with different clinical manifestations and disease activity.

Patients and methods: A cross-sectional study that includes 100 JSLE patients from Ain Shams University Hospital was conducted. All subjects underwent history taking, clinical examination, assessment of disease activity based on the SLE disease activity index (SLEDAI), laboratory investigations, and tests for autoantibodies, namely ANA, anti-dsDNA, and anti-ENA antibodies, including anti-Ro (SSA), anti-La (SSB), anti-Smith (Sm), and anti-U1-ribonucleoprotein (U1-RNP).

Results: The most common clinical features were polyarthralgia (71%), haematological manifestations (65%), malar rash (54%), and nephritis (51%), respectively. All patients had positive ANA (100%), while anti-dsDNA frequency was 83%. The most common anti-ENA antibodies were anti-RNP (41%), anti-Sm (31%), anti-SSA (27%), and anti-SSB (20%), respectively. Anti-RNP had a clinical association with oral ulcer, Raynaud' phenomena, haematological, neuropsychiatric and thromboembolic manifestations. Meanwhile, anti-Sm had a significant association with serositis, mucocutaneous, constitutional, and neuropsychiatric manifestations. Anti-SSA was associated with mucocutaneous, musculoskeletal, Raynaud' phenomena, renal, haematological and cardiac manifestations, while anti-SSB was significantly associated with malar rash, serositis, thromboembolic, musculoskeletal, and neuropsychiatric manifestations. Concerning SLEADI score, anti-dsDNA antibody was significantly associated with moderate disease activity score (p=0.032) while anti-SSA significantly associated with high disease activity (p=0.045). Both anti-SSB and anti-Sm were significantly associated with both moderate and high disease activities, meanwhile anti-U1-RNP was associated with moderate disease activity (p=0.014).

Conclusion: Anti-dsDNA and anti-ENAs antibodies were frequently found in JSLE patients (83%, 63%), respectively. They were significantly associated with variable clinical manifestations and could be used as predictors for assessment of disease activity.

Rheumatic inflammatory diseases include a diverse and heterogeneous group of multifaceted disorders in which clinical history and physical examination are essential to make treatment choices and for optimizing outcomes. Composite outcome measures have become very relevant in rheumatology to evaluate disease activity as they capture the most important dimensions of the disease into one single measure. Most outcome measures may include disease manifestations, laboratory data, physician examination as well as the patient perspective as different outcome dimensions of the disease into a simple index. These outcome measures have proved their utility for guiding treatment in treat-to- target strategies and personalized medicine, with remission being the ultimate goal. In this narrative review, we go over the most commonly used outcome measures in rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthropathies, including psoriatic arthritis, and systemic lupus erythematosus to provide a practical summary for clinicians for everyday routine care.

Glucocorticoids are effective immunosuppressants used in a wide variety of diseases. Their use results in secondary osteoporosis in about 30-50% of chronic glucocorticoid users. Glucocorticoids cause a rapid decline in bone strength within the first 3-6 months mostly due to increased bone resorption by osteoclasts. This is followed by a more gradual loss of bone partly due to decreased osteoblastogenesis and osteoblast and osteocyte apoptosis. The loss of bone strength induced by glucocorticoids is not fully captured by bone mineral density measurements. Other tools such as the trabecular bone score and advanced imaging techniques give insight into bone quality; however, these are not used widely in clinical practice. Glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis should be seen as a widely preventable disease. Currently, only about 15% of chronic glucocorticoid users are receiving optimal care. Glucocorticoids should be prescribed at the lowest dose and shortest duration. All patients should be counselled on lifestyle measures to maintain bone strength including nutrition and weight-bearing exercise. Pharmacological therapy should be considered for all patients at moderate to high risk of fracture as there is evidence for the prevention of bone loss and fractures with a favourable safety profile. Oral bisphosphonates are the current mainstay of therapy, whereas osteoanabolic agents may be considered for those at highest risk of fracture.

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes and postpartum complications, especially with severe disease activity.

Objective: The current study aimed to compare the pregnancy outcomes in patients with RA and healthy controls as well as to assess the impact of disease-related variables, medications and disease activity on pregnancy and neonatal-related outcomes in the Saudi population.

Methods: This prospective multicenter study included pregnant female patients with RA from three tertiary centers in Saudi Arabia. The demographics, disease activity scoring (DAS28-CRP), medication before and during pregnancy, pregnancy-related outcomes, and complications in comparison to age-matched healthy female controls were noted.

Results: A total of 77 pregnant patients with RA and 250 healthy age-matched pregnant controls were included in the study. A total of 67.53% were in remission before conception (DAS28CRP ≤2.6), and 81.8% of pregnancies were planned. Age of conception, preterm labor, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission and low birth weight were statistically significant (p <0.05) and higher in RA patients than in healthy controls. Longer disease duration (p <0.001), and high C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate levels before conception (p ≤0.001) were statistically associated with preterm NICU admission. There was statistically significant association between mild (p = 0.015) or moderate to severe DAS28-CRP (p = 0.001) and RA patients regarding pregnancy outcomes. The classification table obtained from the logistic model showed patients with mild and moderate-severe DAS28-CRP have significantly high chances of having an adverse pregnancy outcome.

Conclusion: RA has a negative impact on pregnancy-related outcomes. Higher disease activity is considered a major risk; thus, tight disease control should be aimed. Planned pregnancy follow-up is associated with better pregnancy outcomes.