To define the optimal biologic agent for systemic JIA (sJIA) based on safety and efficacy data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT).
Through a systematic literature search, sJIA RCTs evaluating ...biologic agents were identified. The primary efficacy outcome was defined as a 30% improvement according to the modified American College of Rheumatology Paediatric 30 response criteria (JIA ACR30). The primary safety outcome was defined as serious adverse events (SAEs). Outcomes were analysed by pairwise and network meta-analyses. The quality of evidence between biologic agents was assessed by applying the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.
From the 493 citations originally identified, 5 RCTs were eligible for inclusion-one each for anakinra, canakinumab and tocilizumab and two for rilonacept: all vs placebo. While all were effective, the network meta-analysis indicated with low-quality evidence (due to indirect comparison and inconsistency) that rilonacept-treated patients were less likely to respond than those treated with canakinumab odds ratio (OR) 0.10 (95% CI 0.02, 0.38), P = 0.001 or tocilizumab OR 0.12 (95% CI 0.03, 0.44), P = 0.001. Risks of SAEs were similar among the biologic agents (supported by very low-quality evidence) and not different from placebo.
Despite heterogeneous eligibility criteria and study designs across the five studies and different modified JIA ACR30 criteria, this meta-analysis of short-term RCTs presents empirical evidence that canakinumab and tocilizumab are more effective than rilonacept. Biologic agents in sJIA seem safe and comparable with respect to SAE risk in the short term.
Objective
To compare results of obese patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) who, after an intensive weight loss regimen, received 1 year of either dietary support (D), a knee‐exercise program (E), ...or “no attention” (C; control group).
Methods
We conducted a randomized, 2‐phase, parallel‐group trial. A total of 192 obese participants with knee OA were enrolled; the mean age was 62.5 years and 81% were women with a mean entry weight of 103.2 kg. In phase 1, all participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups and began a dietary regimen of 400–810 and 1,250 kcal/day for 16 weeks (2 8‐week phases) to achieve a major weight loss. Phase 2 consisted of 52 weeks' maintenance in either group D, E, or C. Outcomes were changes from randomization in pain on a 100‐mm visual analog scale, weight, and response according to the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology‐Osteoarthritis Research Society International criteria.
Results
Mean weight loss for phase 1 was 12.8 kg. After 1 year on maintenance therapy, the D group sustained a lower weight (11.0 kg, 95% confidence interval 95% CI 9.0, 12.8 kg) than those in the E (6.2, 95% CI 4.4, 8.1 kg) and C (8.2, 95% CI 6.4, 10.1 kg) groups (P = 0.002 by analysis of covariance ANCOVA). Adherence was low in the E group. All groups had statistically significant pain reduction (D: 6.1; E: 5.6; and C: 5.5 mm) with no difference between groups (P = 0.98 by ANCOVA). In each group 32 (50%), 26 (41%), and 33 (52%) participants responded to treatment in the D, E, and C groups, respectively, with no statistically significant difference in the number of responders (P = 0.41).
Conclusion
A significant weight reduction with a 1‐year maintenance program improves knee OA symptoms irrespective of maintenance program.
Despite the nutritional value of meat, a large volume of reviews and meta-analyses suggests that processed meat intake is associated with an increased risk of chronic diseases. However, assessments ...of the quality of these published reviews internal validity are generally lacking. We systematically reviewed and assessed the quality alongside summarizing the results of previously published systematic reviews and meta-analyses that examined the association between processed meat intake and cancers, type II diabetes (T2D), and cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Reviews and meta-analyses published until May 2018 were identified through a systematic literature search in the databases MEDLINE and EMBASE, and reference lists of included reviews. The quality of the systematic reviews and meta-analyses was assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). All eligible reviews had to comply with two quality requirements: providing sufficient information on quality assessment of the primary studies and a comprehensive search. The results were summarized for T2D, CVD, and each of the different cancer types. The certainty in the estimates of the individual outcomes was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) method. In total, 22 systematic reviews were eligible and thus included in this review. More than 100 reviews were excluded because quality assessment of the primary studies had not been performed. The AMSTAR score of the included reviews ranged from 5 to 8 indicating moderate quality. Overall, the quality assessments of primary studies of the reviews are generally lacking; the scientific quality of the systematic reviews reporting positive associations between processed meat intake and risk of various cancers, T2D and CVD is moderate, and the results from case-control studies suggest more often a positive association than the results from cohort studies. The overall certainty in the evidence was very low across all individual outcomes, due to serious risk of bias and imprecision.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most serious total joint arthroplasty (TJA) complication despite several aseptic and antiseptic preventive measures. There is no clear evidence or even ...consensus, whether antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) should be used, in addition to systemic short-term routine antibiotic prophylaxis, to reduce the risk of PJI in primary TJA. We aimed to analyze the efficacy of ALBC for prevention of PJI in patients undergoing primary TJA.
We searched systematically for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane library. Two reviewers independently screened potentially eligible studies according to predefined selection criteria and assessed the risk of bias using a modified version of the Cochrane risk of bias tool. PJI was prespecified as the primary outcome of interest. The meta-analyses were based on risk ratios using random-effects model per default. For the purpose of sensitivity, the corresponding fixed effects model odds ratios were calculated with the use of the Peto method as well. To evaluate a potential difference in effect sizes using different types (subgroups) of antibiotics used in bone cement, and at different follow-up periods, we performed stratified meta-analyses.
Thirty-seven studies were eligible for the systematic review and qualitative synthesis, and 9 trials (6507 total joint arthroplasties) were included in this meta-analysis. Overall ALBC significantly reduced the risk of PJI following primary TJAs (RRs, 0.36; 95% CIs, 0.16 to 0.80; P = 0.01) with a moderate degree of inconsistency (I2 = 47%). Based on stratified meta-analyses the use of gentamicin appeared to have a better effect (P = 0.0005) in the total hip arthroplasty. Pooled data of different antibiotics used in knee arthroplasties showed a significant association of cefuroxime (RRs, 0.08; 95% CIs, 0.01 to 0.63; P = 0.02). Further, ALBCs significantly reduced the PJI at one and two years of follow-up (P = 0.03 and P = 0.005 respectively).
The evidence suggests that ALBCs are effective in reducing the PJI following primary TJA; i.e. between 20 and 84% reduced risk. However, the clear limitations of the available trial evidence highlight the need for joint-specific confirmatory trials, that will need to be designed as cluster-randomized trials of clinics in countries with well-functioning arthroplasty registries.
The translational potential of this article: This meta-analysis highlights the prophylactic potential of ALBCs in lowering the risk of infection following primary hip or knee arthroplasties but emphasizes the need for more recent confirmatory trials.
It is unclear whether sex or age modify the association of glucocorticoid (GC) use with reduced bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
We studied cross-sectional data ...of RA patients with current or previous GC treatment in a single center cohort study (Rh-GIOP cohort). Our primary outcome was the minimum T-score (measured by DXA) of either lumbar spine, total femur, or femoral neck. Current GC dose was the main exposure; cumulative GC dose and cumulative duration of GC use were also assessed. Following a predefined statistical analysis plan, linear regression analyses with adjustment for confounders assessed whether the association of GC use with BMD was modified by sex (men versus women) or age (≥ 65 versus < 65 years).
Four hundred eighty-three patients with RA (mean age 64 ± 12 years, 80% women) were included. 33% were not currently taking GCs, 32% were treated with a dose of 5 mg/d prednisone equivalent and 11% with more than 7.5 mg/d. 23% of patients had osteoporosis by DXA (minimum T-score ≤ -2.5). The slope, i.e., the association between changes in minimum T-scores with 1 mg/d change in current GC dose, was similar in men and women (-0.07 and -0.04, respectively; difference -0.03 -0.11 to 0.04; p for interaction = 0.41). Slopes were also similar for elderly and non-elderly patients (-0.03 and -0.04, respectively; difference -0.01 -0.06 to 0.05; p for interaction = 0.77). Using cumulative dose and duration of use as exposures did not lead to substantial changes of these results.
In our sample, the association of GC use with reduced BMD in RA was not modified by sex or age.
Abstract
Background
Low-dose naltrexone (LDN) is used widely as an off-label treatment for pain despite limited evidence for its effectiveness. A few small trials with a high risk of bias have ...investigated the effect of LDN on pain associated with fibromyalgia in women, but larger and more methodologically robust studies are needed. The primary aim of this randomized controlled trial is to investigate if 12 weeks of LDN treatment is superior to placebo in reducing the average pain intensity during the last 7 days in women with fibromyalgia.
Methods
A single-center, permuted block randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial will be performed in Denmark. Randomization comprises 100 women aged 18–64 years diagnosed with fibromyalgia who will be treated with either LDN or placebo for 12 weeks including a 4-week titration phase. The primary outcome is change in average pain intensity (during the last 7 days) from baseline to 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes are other fibromyalgia-related symptoms, i.e., tenderness, fatigue, sleep disturbance, stiffness, memory problems, depression, anxiety and measures of global assessment, physical function, impact of fibromyalgia, pain distribution, and health-related quality of life. Intention-to-treat analysis will be performed, and the number of responders with a more than 15%, 30%, and 50% improvement of pain after 12 weeks will be calculated for the LDN and placebo groups. Exploratory outcomes include measures of pain sensitivity, muscle performance, and biomarkers.
Discussion
This study will contribute with high-level evidence on the efficacy of low-dose naltrexone for the treatment of pain in women with fibromyalgia. Secondary outcomes include both disease-specific and generic components investigating whether LDN influences other symptoms than pain. Explorative outcomes are included to provide greater insight into the mechanism of action of LDN and possibly a better understanding of the underlying pathology in fibromyalgia.
Trial registration
EudraCT 2019-000702-30. Registered on 12 July 2019.
ClinicalTrials.gov
NCT04270877. Registered on 17 February 2020
Arthritis patients often take fish oil supplements to alleviate symptoms, but limited evidence exists regarding their efficacy. The objective was to evaluate whether marine oil supplements reduce ...pain and/or improve other clinical outcomes in patients with arthritis. Six databases were searched systematically (24 February 2015). We included randomized trials of oral supplements of all marine oils compared with a control in arthritis patients. The internal validity was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and heterogeneity was explored using restricted maximum of likelihood (REML)-based meta-regression analysis. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to rate the overall quality of the evidence. Forty-two trials were included; 30 trials reported complete data on pain. The standardized mean difference (SMD) suggested a favorable effect (-0.24; 95% confidence interval, CI, -0.42 to -0.07; heterogeneity,
² = 63%. A significant effect was found in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (22 trials; -0.21; 95% CI, -0.42 to -0.004) and other or mixed diagnoses (3 trials; -0.63; 95% CI, -1.20 to -0.06), but not in osteoarthritis patients (5 trials; -0.17; 95% CI, -0.57-0.24). The evidence for using marine oil to alleviate pain in arthritis patients was overall of low quality, but of moderate quality in rheumatoid arthritis patients.
Despite significant cost differences, the comparative effect of combination treatments of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) with and without biologic agents has rarely been examined. ...Thus we performed a network meta-analysis on the effect of combination therapies on progression of radiographic joint erosions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
The following combination drug therapies compared versus single DMARD were investigated: Double DMARD: 2 DMARDs (methotrexate, sulfasalazine, leflunomide, injectable gold, cyclosporine, chloroquine, azathioprin, penicillamin) or 1 DMARD plus low dose glucocorticoid (LDGC); triple DMARD: 3 DMARDs or 2 DMARDs plus LDGC; biologic combination: 1 DMARD plus biologic agent (tumor necrosis factor α inhibitor (TNFi) or abatacept or tocilizumab or CD20 inhibitor (CD20i)). Randomized controlled trials were identified in a search of electronic archives of biomedical literature and included in a star-shaped network meta-analysis and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement protocol. Effects are reported as standardized mean differences (SMD). The effects of data from 39 trials published in the period 1989-2012 were as follows: Double DMARD: -0.32 SMD (CI: -0.42, -0.22); triple DMARD: -0.46 SMD (CI: -0.60, -0.31); 1 DMARD plus TNFi: -0.30 SMD (CI: -0.36, -0.25); 1 DMARD plus abatacept: -0.20 SMD (CI: -0.33, -0.07); 1 DMARD plus tocilizumab: -0.34 SMD (CI: -0.48, -0.20); 1 DMARD plus CD20i: -0.32 SMD (CI: -0.40, -0.24). The indirect comparisons showed similar effects between combination treatments apart from triple DMARD being significantly better than abatacept plus methotrexate (-0.26 SMD (CI: -0.45, -0.07)) and TNFi plus methotrexate (-0.16 SMD (CI: -0.31, -0.01)).
Combination treatment of a biologic agent with 1 DMARD is not superior to 2-3 DMARDs including or excluding LDGC in preventing structural joint damage. Future randomized studies of biologic agents should be compared versus a combination of DMARDs.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
To assess if the right hand, the dominant hand, or the hand with more clinically swollen joints (SwJ) is per se the most inflamed and exhibits the greatest change during treatment and hence preferred ...for unilateral scoring of synovitis by ultrasound in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.
Using data from two previously published Norwegian RA patient cohorts initiating treatment, bilateral metacarpophalangeal joint 1-5, proximal phalangeal joint 2+3, and wrists were evaluated by ultrasound. Using a 0-3 scoring system a grey-scale (GS), power Doppler (PD) and global synovitis score (GLOESS) was calculated for each hand (0-30). For precision, a difference of < ± 3 in sum score was pre-specified as indicating clinically insignificant difference in inflammatory activity for all three scores.
Four hundred thirty-seven RA patients were included. Baseline ultrasound inflammation was statistically significantly higher in hands with more vs fewer SwJ (mean difference, 95%CI GS sum score 2.211.30 to 3.12, PD sum score 1.70 0.94 to 2.47 and GLOESS 2.311.36 to 3.26) and also exhibited significantly more change for all sum scores at 3 months follow-up (GS sum score 1.34 0.60 to 2.08, PD sum score 1.17 0.44 to 1.91, and GLOESS 1.43 0.63 to 2.22). No such differences were found between the dominant and the non-dominant or the right and the left hands at any time points.
The hand with clinically more SwJ is statistically more inflammatory active according to GS, Doppler, and GLOESS sum scores, exhibits a change during treatment, and is potentially the best choice for unilateral scoring systems.
PDF
