| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Smolen, JS, et al.
(author)
-
EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2022 update
- 2023
-
In: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 82:1, s. 3-18
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- To provide an update of the EULAR rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations addressing the most recent developments in the field.MethodsAn international task force was formed and solicited three systematic literature research activities on safety and efficacy of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs). The new evidence was discussed in light of the last update from 2019. A predefined voting process was applied to each overarching principle and recommendation. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned to and participants finally voted on the level of agreement with each item.ResultsThe task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 11 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); GCs; biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab including biosimilars), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs, namely the Janus kinase inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib. Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering in sustained clinical remission is provided. Safety aspects, including risk of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) and malignancies, costs and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs were all considered. Initially, MTX plus GCs is recommended and on insufficient response to this therapy within 3–6 months, treatment should be based on stratification according to risk factors; With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD should be added to the csDMARD; after careful consideration of risks of MACEs, malignancies and/or thromboembolic events tsDMARDs may also be considered in this phase. If the first bDMARD (or tsDMARD) fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD (considering risks) is recommended. With sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered but should not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were high for most recommendations.ConclusionsThese updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on RA management including safety, effectiveness and cost.
|
|
| 6. |
- Ehlers, L, et al.
(author)
-
2018 EULAR recommendations for a core data set to support observational research and clinical care in giant cell arteritis
- 2019
-
In: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 78:9, s. 1160-1166
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Giant cell arteritis (GCA) represents the most common form of primary systemic vasculitis and is frequently associated with comorbidities related to the disease itself or induced by the treatment. Systematically collected data on disease course, treatment and outcomes of GCA remain scarce. The aim of this EULAR Task Force was to identify a core set of items which can easily be collected by experienced clinicians, in order to facilitate collaborative research into the course and outcomes of GCA. A multidisciplinary EULAR task force group of 20 experts including rheumatologists, internists, epidemiologists and patient representatives was assembled. During a 1-day meeting, breakout groups discussed items from a previously compiled collection of parameters describing GCA status and disease course. Feedback from breakout groups was further discussed. Final consensus was achieved by means of several rounds of email discussions after the meeting. A three-round Delphi survey was conducted to determine a core set of parameters including the level of agreement. 117 parameters were regarded as relevant. Potential items were subdivided into the following categories: General, demographics, GCA-related signs and symptoms, other medical conditions and treatment. Possible instruments and assessment intervals were proposed for documentation of each item. To facilitate implementation of the recommendations in clinical care and clinical research, a minimum core set of 50 parameters was agreed. This proposed core set intends to ensure that relevant items from different GCA registries and databases can be compared for the dual purposes of facilitating clinical research and improving clinical care.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Hoes, J. N., et al.
(author)
-
EULAR evidence-based recommendations on the management of systemic glucocorticoid therapy in rheumatic diseases
- 2007
-
In: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 66:12, s. 1560-1567
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: To develop evidence-based recommendations for the management of systemic glucocorticoid ( GC) therapy in rheumatic diseases. Methods: The multidisciplinary guideline development group from 11 European countries, Canada and the USA consisted of 15 rheumatologists, 1 internist, 1 rheumatologist-epidemiologist, 1 health professional, 1 patient and 1 research fellow. The Delphi method was used to agree on 10 key propositions related to the safe use of GCs. A systematic literature search of PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library was then used to identify the best available research evidence to support each of the 10 propositions. The strength of recommendation was given according to research evidence, clinical expertise and perceived patient preference. Results: The 10 propositions were generated through three Delphi rounds and included patient education, risk factors, adverse effects, concomitant therapy ( ie, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, gastroprotection and cyclo-oxygenase-2 selective inhibitors, calcium and vitamin D, bisphosphonates) and special safety advice ( ie, adrenal insufficiency, pregnancy, growth impairment). Conclusion: Ten key recommendations for the management of systemic GC-therapy were formulated using a combination of systematically retrieved research evidence and expert consensus. There are areas of importance that have little evidence ( ie, dosing and tapering strategies, timing, risk factors and monitoring for adverse effects, perioperative GC-replacement) and need further research; therefore also a research agenda was composed.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
|
|
| 12. |
- Safy, M., et al.
(author)
-
Efficacy and safety of selective glucocorticoid receptor modulators in comparison to glucocorticoids in arthritis, a systematic review
- 2017
-
In: PLoS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 12:12
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Long-term treatment with glucocorticoids (GCs) plays an important role in the management of arthritis patients, although the efficacy/safety balance is unfavorable. Alternatives with less (severe) adverse effects but with good efficacy are needed. Selective GC receptor modulators (SGRMs) are designed to engage the GC receptor with dissociative characteristics: transactivation of genes, which is mainly responsible for unwanted effects, is less strong while trans-repression of genes, reducing inflammation, is maintained. It is expected that SGRMs thus have a better efficacy/safety balance than GCs. A systematic review providing an overview of the evidence in arthritis is lacking. Objective To systematically review the current literature on efficacy and safety of oral SGRMs in comparison to GCs in arthritis. Methods A search was performed in Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library, from inception dates of databases until May 2017. Experimental studies involving animal arthritis models or human material of arthritis patients, as well as clinical studies in arthritis patients were included, provided they reported original data. All types of arthritis were included. Data was extracted on the SGRM studied and on the GC used as reference standard; the design or setting of the study was extracted as well as the efficacy and safety results. Results A total of 207 articles was retrieved of which 17 articles were eligible for our analysis. Two studies concerned randomized controlled trials (RCT), five studies were pre-clinical studies using human material, and 10 studies involved pre-clinical animal models (acute and/or chronic arthritis induced in mice or rats). PF-04171327, the only compound investigated in a clinical trial setting, had a better efficacy/safety balance compared to GCs: better clinical anti-inflammatory efficacy and similar safety. Conclusion Studies assessing both efficacy and safety of SGRMs are scarce. There is limited evidence for dissociation of anti-inflammatory and metabolic effects of the SGRMs studied. Development of many SGRMs is haltered in a preclinical phase. One SGRM showed a better clinical efficacy/safety balance. © 2017 Safy et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
|
|
| 13. |
- Smolen, JS, et al.
(author)
-
EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update
- 2017
-
In: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 76:6, s. 960-977
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Recent insights in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) necessitated updating the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) RA management recommendations. A large international Task Force based decisions on evidence from 3 systematic literature reviews, developing 4 overarching principles and 12 recommendations (vs 3 and 14, respectively, in 2013). The recommendations address conventional synthetic (cs) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); glucocorticoids (GC); biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, clazakizumab, sarilumab and sirukumab and biosimilar (bs) DMARDs) and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs (Janus kinase (Jak) inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib). Monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and the targets of sustained clinical remission (as defined by the American College of Rheumatology-(ACR)-EULAR Boolean or index criteria) or low disease activity are discussed. Cost aspects were taken into consideration. As first strategy, the Task Force recommends MTX (rapid escalation to 25 mg/week) plus short-term GC, aiming at >50% improvement within 3 and target attainment within 6 months. If this fails stratification is recommended. Without unfavourable prognostic markers, switching to—or adding—another csDMARDs (plus short-term GC) is suggested. In the presence of unfavourable prognostic markers (autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions, failure of 2 csDMARDs), any bDMARD (current practice) or Jak-inhibitor should be added to the csDMARD. If this fails, any other bDMARD or tsDMARD is recommended. If a patient is in sustained remission, bDMARDs can be tapered. For each recommendation, levels of evidence and Task Force agreement are provided, both mostly very high. These recommendations intend informing rheumatologists, patients, national rheumatology societies, hospital officials, social security agencies and regulators about EULAR's most recent consensus on the management of RA, aimed at attaining best outcomes with current therapies.
|
|
| 14. |
- Smolen, JS, et al.
(author)
-
EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2019 update
- 2020
-
In: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 79:6, s. 685-699
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- To provide an update of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management recommendations to account for the most recent developments in the field.MethodsAn international task force considered new evidence supporting or contradicting previous recommendations and novel therapies and strategic insights based on two systematic literature searches on efficacy and safety of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) since the last update (2016) until 2019. A predefined voting process was applied, current levels of evidence and strengths of recommendation were assigned and participants ultimately voted independently on their level of agreement with each of the items.ResultsThe task force agreed on 5 overarching principles and 12 recommendations concerning use of conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDs (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); glucocorticoids (GCs); biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, sarilumab and biosimilar (bs) DMARDs) and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs (the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib, filgotinib, upadacitinib). Guidance on monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and tapering on sustained clinical remission is provided. Cost and sequencing of b/tsDMARDs are addressed. Initially, MTX plus GCs and upon insufficient response to this therapy within 3 to 6 months, stratification according to risk factors is recommended. With poor prognostic factors (presence of autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions or failure of two csDMARDs), any bDMARD or JAK inhibitor should be added to the csDMARD. If this fails, any other bDMARD (from another or the same class) or tsDMARD is recommended. On sustained remission, DMARDs may be tapered, but not be stopped. Levels of evidence and levels of agreement were mostly high.ConclusionsThese updated EULAR recommendations provide consensus on the management of RA with respect to benefit, safety, preferences and cost.
|
|
| 15. |
- Teruel, M, et al.
(author)
-
Integrative epigenomics in Sjögren´s syndrome reveals novel pathways and a strong interaction between the HLA, autoantibodies and the interferon signature
- 2021
-
In: Scientific reports. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2045-2322. ; 11:1, s. 23292-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Primary Sjögren’s syndrome (SS) is a systemic autoimmune disease characterized by lymphocytic infiltration and damage of exocrine salivary and lacrimal glands. The etiology of SS is complex with environmental triggers and genetic factors involved. By conducting an integrated multi-omics study, we confirmed a vast coordinated hypomethylation and overexpression effects in IFN-related genes, what is known as the IFN signature. Stratified and conditional analyses suggest a strong interaction between SS-associated HLA genetic variation and the presence of Anti-Ro/SSA autoantibodies in driving the IFN epigenetic signature and determining SS. We report a novel epigenetic signature characterized by increased DNA methylation levels in a large number of genes enriched in pathways such as collagen metabolism and extracellular matrix organization. We identified potential new genetic variants associated with SS that might mediate their risk by altering DNA methylation or gene expression patterns, as well as disease-interacting genetic variants that exhibit regulatory function only in the SS population. Our study sheds new light on the interaction between genetics, autoantibody profiles, DNA methylation and gene expression in SS, and contributes to elucidate the genetic architecture of gene regulation in an autoimmune population.
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
- Unger, J, et al.
(author)
-
The Experiences of Functioning and Health of Patients With Primary Sjögren's Syndrome: A Multicenter Qualitative European Study
- 2021
-
In: Frontiers in medicine. - : Frontiers Media SA. - 2296-858X. ; 8, s. 770422-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: To identify a spectrum of perspectives on functioning and health of patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome (pSS) from the five European countries in order to reveal commonalities and insights in their experiences.Methods: A multicenter focus group study on the patients with pSS about their perspectives of functioning and health was performed. Focus groups were chaired by trained moderators based on an interview guide, audiotaped, and transcribed. After conducting a meaning condensation analysis of each focus group, we subsequently combined the extracted concepts from each country and mapped them to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).Results: Fifty-one patients with pSS participated in 12 focus groups. We identified a total of 82 concepts meaningful to people with pSS. Of these, 55 (67%) were mentioned by the patients with pSS in at least four of five countries and 36 (44%) emerged in all the five countries. Most concepts were assigned to the ICF components activities and participation (n = 25, 30%), followed by 22 concepts (27%) that were considered to be not definable or not covered by the ICF; 15 concepts (18%) linked to body structures and functions. Participants reported several limitations in the daily life due to a mismatch between the capabilities of the person, the demands of the environment and the requirements of the activities.Conclusion: Concepts that emerged in all the five non-English speaking countries may be used to guide the development and adaption of the patient-reported outcome measures and to enhance the provision of treatment options based on the aspects meaningful to patients with pSS in clinical routine.
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
