| 1. |
- Ruperto, N., et al.
(författare)
-
A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of infliximab plus methotrexate for the treatment of polyarticular-course juvenile rheumatoid arthritis
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Arthritis Rheum. - : Wiley. - 0004-3591. ; 56:9, s. 3096-3106
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of infliximab in the treatment of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (JRA). METHODS: This was an international, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. One hundred twenty-two children with persistent polyarticular JRA despite prior methotrexate (MTX) therapy were randomized to receive infliximab or placebo for 14 weeks, after which all children received infliximab through week 44. Patients received MTX plus infliximab 3 mg/kg through week 44, or MTX plus placebo for 14 weeks followed by MTX plus infliximab 6 mg/kg through week 44. RESULTS: Although a higher proportion of patients in the 3 mg/kg infliximab group than in the placebo group had achieved responses according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Pediatric 30 (Pedi 30) criteria for improvement at week 14 (63.8% and 49.2%, respectively), the between-group difference in this primary efficacy end point was not statistically significant (P = 0.12). By week 16, after the crossover from placebo to infliximab 6 mg/kg when all patients were receiving infliximab, an ACR Pedi 30 response was achieved in 73.2% of all patients. By week 52, ACR Pedi 50 and ACR Pedi 70 responses had been reached in 69.6% and 51.8%, respectively, of patients. Infliximab was generally well tolerated, but the safety profile of infliximab 3 mg/kg appeared less favorable than that of infliximab 6 mg/kg, with more frequent occurrences of serious adverse events, infusion reactions, antibodies to infliximab, and newly induced antinuclear antibodies and antibodies to double-stranded DNA observed with the 3 mg/kg dose. CONCLUSION: While infliximab at 3 mg/kg and 6 mg/kg showed durable efficacy at 1 year, achievement of the primary efficacy end point at 3 months did not differ significantly between infliximab-treated and placebo-treated patients. Safety data indicated that the 6-mg/kg dose may provide a more favorable risk/benefit profile. These results warrant further investigation in children with JRA.
|
|
| 2. |
- Ruperto, N., et al.
(författare)
-
PRINTO/PRES international website for families of children with rheumatic diseases: www.pediatric-rheumatology.printo.it
- 2005
-
Ingår i: Ann Rheum Dis. - : BMJ. - 0003-4967. ; 64:7, s. 1101-6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To prepare a website for families and health professionals containing up to date information about paediatric rheumatic diseases (PRD). METHODS: Firstly, paediatric rheumatology centres and family self help associations were surveyed to characterise current clinical practice of physicians providing care for children with PRD, research activities, and training facilities of each centre. Secondly, international consensus was reached on the content of the website. Finally, the website was developed and the texts translated. RESULTS: The web page contains three main sections: (a) description for families of the characteristics of 15 PRD; (b) list of paediatric rheumatology centres; (c) contact information for family self help associations. A version for 45 countries in 52 languages (with another three in progress) is now available on the web. 291 surveys from 171 centres and 102 family associations were received from 42 countries. The median proportion of time spent in paediatric practice in the centres examined was 100%, with 70% of this time dedicated to paediatric rheumatology. 90% of the centres were willing to perform clinical trials in the future. CONCLUSIONS: The PRINTO/PRES website provides a well defined and competent set of information about PRD, with appropriate multiple translated versions and easy web navigational direction.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Ravelli, A, et al.
(författare)
-
2016 Classification Criteria for Macrophage Activation Syndrome Complicating Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: A European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology/Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation Collaborative Initiative
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 75:3, s. 481-489
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To develop criteria for the classification of macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) in patients with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). A multistep process, based on a combination of expert consensus and analysis of real patient data, was conducted. A panel of 28 experts was first asked to classify 428 patient profiles as having or not having MAS, based on clinical and laboratory features at the time of disease onset. The 428 profiles comprised 161 patients with systemic JIA—associated MAS and 267 patients with a condition that could potentially be confused with MAS (active systemic JIA without evidence of MAS, or systemic infection). Next, the ability of candidate criteria to classify individual patients as having MAS or not having MAS was assessed by evaluating the agreement between the classification yielded using the criteria and the consensus classification of the experts. The final criteria were selected in a consensus conference. Experts achieved consensus on the classification of 391 of the 428 patient profiles (91.4%). A total of 982 candidate criteria were tested statistically. The 37 best-performing criteria and 8 criteria obtained from the literature were evaluated at the consensus conference. During the conference, 82% consensus among experts was reached on the final MAS classification criteria. In validation analyses, these criteria had a sensitivity of 0.73 and a specificity of 0.99. Agreement between the classification (MAS or not MAS) obtained using the criteria and the original diagnosis made by the treating physician was high (κ=0.76). We have developed a set of classification criteria for MAS complicating systemic JIA and provided preliminary evidence of its validity. Use of these criteria will potentially improve understanding of MAS in systemic JIA and enhance efforts to discover effective therapies, by ensuring appropriate patient enrollment in studies.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- van Assen, S., et al.
(författare)
-
EULAR recommendations for vaccination in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 70:3, s. 414-422
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives To develop evidence-based European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for vaccination in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD). Methods A EULAR task force was composed of experts representing 11 European countries, consisting of eight rheumatologists, four clinical immunologists, one rheumatologist/clinical immunologist, one infectious disease physician, one nephrologist, one paediatrician/rheumatologist and one clinical epidemiologist. Key questions were formulated and the eligible spectrum of AIIRD, immunosuppressive drugs and vaccines were defined in order to perform a systematic literature review. A search was made of Medline from 1966 to October 2009 as well as abstracts from the EULAR meetings of 2008 and 2009 and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) meetings of 2007 and 2008. Evidence was graded in categories I-IV, the strength of recommendations was graded in categories A-D and Delphi voting was applied to determine the level of agreement between the experts of the task force. Results Eight key questions and 13 recommendations addressing vaccination in patients with AIIRD were formulated. The strength of each recommendation was determined. Delphi voting revealed a very high level of agreement with the recommendations among the experts of the task force. Finally, a research agenda was proposed. Conclusion Recommendations for vaccination in patients with AIIRD based on the currently available evidence and expert opinion were formulated. More research is needed, particularly regarding the incidence of vaccine-preventable infectious diseases and the safety of vaccination in patients with AIIRD.
|
|
