| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Ehlers, L, et al.
(författare)
-
2018 EULAR recommendations for a core data set to support observational research and clinical care in giant cell arteritis
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 78:9, s. 1160-1166
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)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.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Safy, M., et al.
(författare)
-
Efficacy and safety of selective glucocorticoid receptor modulators in comparison to glucocorticoids in arthritis, a systematic review
- 2017
-
Ingår i: PLoS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 12:12
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)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.
|
|
| 7. |
- Smolen, JS, et al.
(författare)
-
EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 76:6, s. 960-977
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)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.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
