| 1. |
- van Vollenhoven, R, et al.
(författare)
-
A framework for remission in SLE: consensus findings from a large international task force on definitions of remission in SLE (DORIS)
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 76:3, s. 554-561
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Treat-to-target recommendations have identified ‘remission’ as a target in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), but recognise that there is no universally accepted definition for this. Therefore, we initiated a process to achieve consensus on potential definitions for remission in SLE.MethodsAn international task force of 60 specialists and patient representatives participated in preparatory exercises, a face-to-face meeting and follow-up electronic voting. The level for agreement was set at 90%.ResultsThe task force agreed on eight key statements regarding remission in SLE and three principles to guide the further development of remission definitions:1. Definitions of remission will be worded as follows: remission in SLE is a durable state characterised by …………………. (reference to symptoms, signs, routine labs).2. For defining remission, a validated index must be used, for example, clinical systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index (SLEDAI)=0, British Isles lupus assessment group (BILAG) 2004 D/E only, clinical European consensus lupus outcome measure (ECLAM)=0; with routine laboratory assessments included, and supplemented with physician's global assessment.3. Distinction is made between remission off and on therapy: remission off therapy requires the patient to be on no other treatment for SLE than maintenance antimalarials; and remission on therapy allows patients to be on stable maintenance antimalarials, low-dose corticosteroids (prednisone ≤5 mg/day), maintenance immunosuppressives and/or maintenance biologics.The task force also agreed that the most appropriate outcomes (dependent variables) for testing the prognostic value (construct validity) of potential remission definitions are: death, damage, flares and measures of health-related quality of life.ConclusionsThe work of this international task force provides a framework for testing different definitions of remission against long-term outcomes.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- 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.
|
|
| 4. |
- van Assen, S., et al.
(författare)
-
Vaccination in adult patients with auto-immune inflammatory rheumatic diseases: A systematic literature review for the European League Against Rheumatism evidence-based recommendations for vaccination in adult patients with auto-immune inflammatory rheumatic diseases
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Autoimmunity Reviews. - : Elsevier BV. - 1873-0183 .- 1568-9972. ; 10:6, s. 341-352
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: To present the systematic literature review (SLR), which formed the basis for the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) evidence-based recommendations for vaccination in adult patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRD). Methods: AIIRD, vaccines and immunomodulating drugs, as well as eight key questions were defined by the multidisciplinary expert committee commissioned by EULAR for developing the recommendations. A SLR was performed using MedLine through October 2009 and including data from meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomized trials, and observational studies, excluding case series with participants. Articles in English and regarding patients years of age, were eligible. Results: Several vaccine-preventable infections (VPI) occur more often in AIIRD-patients and most vaccines are efficacious in AIIRD-patients, even when treated with immunomodulating agents, except rituximab. There does not appear to be an increase in vaccination-related harms in vaccinated patients with AIIRD in comparison with unvaccinated patients with AIIRD. However, these studies are underpowered and therefore not conclusive. Conclusion: Based on the current evidence from the literature, recommendations for vaccination in patients with AIIRD were made. However, more research is needed in particular regarding incidence of VPI, harms of vaccination and the influence of (new and established) immunomodulating agents on vaccination efficacy. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
