Precautions before starting tofacitinib in persons with rheumatoid arthritis

Tofacitinib is an immunosuppressive and disease-modifying therapy in rheumatoid arthritis. It may result in many infections flaring up. It is important to take precautions of all kinds (cardiovascular, malignancy, infections etc.) before starting tofacitinib. In this article, we have highlighted important steps where we need to take precautions before starting tofacitinib.     

Important determinants of the patient choice between TNF- vs. non-TNF Biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) for active rheumatoid arthritis (RA)

ObjectiveTo assess why patients choose TNF- versus non-TNF biologics for treating active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) after methotrexate-failure.MethodsParticipants responded to the question “What sort of things help a patient decide the treatment choice between the two types of injectable biologics, TNF biologic versus non-TNF biologic, for treating active rheumatoid arthritis when methotrexate fails to control RA disease activity?” They nominated responses, discussed and then voted.ResultsForty-four patients participated in 10 nominal groups (Birmingham; n = 6; New York City: n = 4), who were predominantly female (86%), 68% white, with a mean age of 65 (standard deviation [SD], 12) years. Present/past DMARDs included methotrexate in 91%, glucocorticoids in 11%, and biologics and/or Jak-inhibitors in 68% of participants. Pain and fatigue were mild-moderate with means of 3.9 (SD, 2.5) and 4.3 (SD, 2.5), respectively, on 0-10 scale; mean morning joint stiffness was 1.3 hours (SD, 2.1). The number of groups that nominated each response and total votes were as follows: (1) Side effects/fear of side effects: 10/10; 31% votes (82/264); (2) Efficacy/ability to reduce joint damage: 9/10; 30% votes (80/264); (3) Doctor's opinion, 6/10; 12% votes (32/264); (4) Cost, 7/10; 9% votes (25/264); (5) Other drugs/comorbidity, 4/10; 12% votes (31/264); (6) Experience of others/information-seeking/own research, 2/10; 2% votes (5/264); (7) Newness, 1/10; 2% votes (6/264); and (8) Convenience/frequency of use, 1/10; 1% votes (3/264).ConclusionsWe identified the patient perspective of choice between TNF versus non-TNF biologic for treating active RA. This knowledge can help in informative shared decision-making in clinical care.     

One-year clinical results with actarit—a preliminary report

Abstract

The effectiveness and safety of 1-year treatment with actarit were evaluated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Treatment was continued for 1 year or longer in 18 of the 34 patients. Early improvement in morning stiffness, grip strength, joint score and the Lansbury’s index were observed. Improvement in 1-h eythrocyte sedimentation rate was observed at the 12-month assessment. IgG was decreased at the 12-month assessment. Obvious improvement in C-reactive protein was not seen through the trial. No abnormal findings were noted in routine blood tests. Adverse reactions of special note were skin eruption in one patient and digestive symptom in one patient. However, no serious adverse reactions were observed.     

Psychosocial predictors of DMARD adherence in the first three months of treatment for early arthritis

ObjectivesTo induce disease remission, early arthritis patients should adhere to their disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in the first months after diagnosis. It remains unknown why some patients are non-adherent. We aimed to identify patients at risk for non-adherence in the first 3 months of treatment.MethodsAdult DMARD-naive early arthritis patients starting synthetic DMARDs filled out items on potential adherence predictors at baseline. Adherence was measured continuously. Non-adherence was defined as not opening the electronically monitored pill bottle when it should have been. Items were reduced and clustered using principal component analysis. The most discriminating items were identified with latent trait models. We used a multivariable logistic regression model to find non-adherence predictors.Results301 patients agreed to participate. Adherence was high and declined over time. Principal component analysis led to 7 dimensions, while subsequent latent trait models analyses led to 15 dimensions. Two dimensions were associated with adherence, one dimension was associated with non-adherence.ConclusionsInformation seeking behavior and positive expectations about the course of the disease are associated with adherence. Patients who become passive because of pain are at risk for non-adherence.Practice implicationsRheumatologists have cues to identify non-adherence, and may intervene on non-adherence through implementing shared decision making techniques.     

门诊风湿病就诊及其影响因素的调查和分析

目的：了解风湿科门诊的常见病种、发病危险因素和诊治状况等。方法：对2005年7月18日～7月27日就诊于中山医院风湿科门诊的98例患者以问卷的形式进行横断面调查，结果进行统计分析。结果：就诊患者以中年者居多，职业多为工人，痛风、类风湿关节炎（类风关）比例在一半以上。患者多在就诊后2年应用改变病情药物（DMARDs）。痛风患者以工人、科研工作者、经商者居多。类风关患者平均在关节痛出现3年后服用DMARDs，有81.48%的患者服用该类药物，其中绝大多数患者服用甲氨蝶呤（MTX），其次为MTX与青霉胺或与柳氮磺胺吡啶联合用药。类风关患者HAQ分值最高。结论：风湿疾病的疾病谱较前有所改变，痛风成为最常见病种。DMARDs的应用率较广，但未被早期应用。风湿疾病中以类风关患者的生活质量为较差，痛风者相对较好。     

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis undergoing surgery: how should we deal with antirheumatic treatment?

OBJECTIVES: To review published data on the perioperative management of antirheumatic treatment and perioperative outcome in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: The review is based on a MEDLINE (PubMed) search of the English-language literature from 1965 to 2005, using the index keywords "rheumatoid arthritis" and "surgery". As co-indexing terms the different disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) as well as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and "glucocorticoids" were used. In addition, citations from retrieved articles were scanned for additional references. Furthermore, because the number of published articles is so limited, relevant abstracts presented at congresses were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Continuation of methotrexate (MTX) appears to be safe in the perioperative period. Only a limited number of studies address the use of leflunomide and the results are conflicting. Because of the very long drug half-life, its discontinuation would need to be of long duration and is probably not necessary. Data on hydroxychloroquine do not show increased risks of infection. Regarding sulfasalazine, there are no studies from which definite answers could be drawn on whether it should be withheld perioperatively. Preliminary data show that the risk of infections during treatment with TNF-blocking agents may be lower than initially expected. The only available recommendation (Club Rhumatismes et Inflammation, CRI) suggests discontinuing the drugs before surgery for several weeks, depending on the risk of infection and the drug used. They should not be restarted until wound healing is complete. To avoid the antiplatelet effect during surgery, NSAIDs other than aspirin should be withheld for a duration of 4 to 5 times the drug half-life. Patients with chronic glucocorticoid therapy and suppressed hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis need perioperative supplementation. CONCLUSIONS: While continuation of MTX likely is safe, data on other DMARDs are sparse. In particular, more data on the perioperative use of the biologic agents are needed.     

Have traditional DMARDs had their day?

This review tries to answer the question of whether in the face of the recently introduced biologics conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) can still be recommended in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We start with an overview of the oldest conventional DMARD, injectable gold (Au), which was introduced in the treatment of RA in the 1920s. The effect of gold is directed at a number of different sites of the immune system. A significant improvement of clinical and biochemical disease activity parameters as well as an inhibition of X-ray progression has been shown in many studies. Head-to-head comparisons between gold and high-dose methotrexate (MTX) demonstrated no significant difference but some advantages for gold. Since trials comparing biologics with gold will never be performed, an indirect comparison was done by analyzing the results of trials with gold with those with biologics. Conclusions from such comparisons have to be drawn with caution especially since the methodology for performing trials has changed with time. We selected four trials with gold (two open, one placebo-controlled, and one comparison with MTX) and five trials with biologics (three placebo-controlled, one dose escalation study, and one comparison with MTX). In all these trials baseline data regarding swollen joint count (SJC), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) were roughly comparable and, with the exception of interleukin (IL)-1 RA, demonstrated a similar improvement of over 50% already after 6 months [with faster onset with tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha blockade]. American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response data were not available for the older gold trials. European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria could be calculated for the Au/MTX trial and were—for these compounds—only slightly inferior to the results with adalimumab. X-ray response is especially difficult to compare across studies. Although an inhibition with Au and MTX could be demonstrated, this occurred—similar to corticosteroid treatment—earlier and more pronounced with TNF-alpha blockers. We confirm the statement of Weinblatt that the most modern DMARDs do not appear to be much better than the oldest one indicating that conventional DMARDs are not outdated. Therefore, a sufficient trial of conventional DMARDs should precede the introduction of treatment with the very expensive biologics.     

Unmet needs in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. An observational study and a real-life experience from a single university center

Objectives

To estimate the size of unmet needs in the treatment of early Rheumatoid Arthritis (eRA), using all the conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) and/or biological DMARDs (bDMARDs) in a long-term observational study.