Disability in young people and adults after head injury: 5–7 year follow up of a prospective cohort study

2007 ◽  
Vol 2007 ◽  
pp. 303-304
Author(s):  
D. Ellegala ◽  
A. Raslan
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Head Injury ◽  
Young People ◽  
Prospective Cohort Study ◽  
Prospective Cohort

scholarly journals POS0647 EFFICACY, SAFETY AND CHARACTERISTICS OF IGURATIMOD-BASED THERAPY IN THE TREATMENT OF UA, ERA AND RA PATIENTS FOR 24 WEEKS: A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 561.2-562
Author(s):  
X. Liu ◽  
Z. Sun ◽  
W. Guo ◽  
F. Wang ◽  
L. Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Prospective Cohort Study ◽  
Early Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Combined Treatment ◽  
Serious Adverse Events

Background:Experts emphasize early diagnosis and treatment in RA, but the widely used diagnostic criterias fail to meet the accurate judgment of early rheumatoid arthritis. In 2012, Professor Zhanguo Li took the lead in establishing ERA “Chinese standard”, and its sensitivity and accuracy have been recognized by peers. However, the optimal first-line treatment of patients (pts) with undifferentiated arthritis (UA), early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA), and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are yet to be established.Objectives:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Iguratimod-based (IGU-based) Strategy in the above three types of pts, and to explore the characteristics of the effects of IGU monotherapy and combined treatment.Methods:This prospective cohort study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01548001) was conducted in China. In this phase 4 study pts with RA (ACR 1987 criteria[1]), ERA (not match ACR 1987 criteria[1] but match ACR/EULAR 2010 criteria[2] or 2014 ERA criteria[3]), UA (not match classification criteria for ERA and RA but imaging suggests synovitis) were recruited. We applied different treatments according to the patient’s disease activity at baseline, including IGU monotherapy and combination therapies with methotrexate, hydroxychloroquine, and prednisone. Specifically, pts with LDA and fewer poor prognostic factors were entered the IGU monotherapy group (25 mg bid), and pts with high disease activity were assigned to combination groups. A Chi-square test was applied for comparison. The primary outcomes were the proportion of pts in remission (REM)or low disease activity (LDA) that is DAS28-ESR<2.6 or 3.2 at 24 weeks, as well as the proportion of pts, achieved ACR20, Boolean remission, and good or moderate EULAR response (G+M).Results:A total of 313 pts (26 pts with UA, 59 pts with ERA, and 228 pts with RA) were included in this study. Of these, 227/313 (72.5%) pts completed the 24-week follow-up. The results showed that 115/227 (50.7%), 174/227 (76.7%), 77/227 (33.9%), 179/227 (78.9%) pts achieved DAS28-ESR defined REM and LDA, ACR20, Boolean remission, G+M response, respectively. All parameters continued to decrease in all pts after treatment (Fig 1).Compared with baseline, the three highest decline indexes of disease activity at week 24 were SW28, CDAI, and T28, with an average decline rate of 73.8%, 61.4%, 58.7%, respectively. Results were similar in three cohorts.We performed a stratified analysis of which IGU treatment should be used in different cohorts. The study found that the proportion of pts with UA and ERA who used IGU monotherapy were significantly higher than those in the RA cohort. While the proportion of triple and quadruple combined use of IGU in RA pts was significantly higher than that of ERA and UA at baseline and whole-course (Fig 2).A total of 81/313 (25.8%) pts in this study had adverse events (AE) with no serious adverse events. The main adverse events were infection(25/313, 7.99%), gastrointestinal disorders(13/313, 4.15%), liver dysfunction(12/313, 3.83%) which were lower than 259/2666 (9.71%) in the previous Japanese phase IV study[4].The most common reasons of lost follow-up were: 1) discontinued after remission 25/86 (29.1%); 2) lost 22/86 (25.6%); 3) drug ineffective 19/86 (22.1%).Conclusion:Both IGU-based monotherapy and combined therapies are tolerant and effective for treating UA, ERA, and RA, while the decline in joint symptoms was most significant. Overall, IGU combination treatments were most used in RA pts, while monotherapy was predominant in ERA and UA pts.References:[1]Levin RW, et al. Scand J Rheumatol 1996, 25(5):277-281.[2]Kay J, et al. Rheumatology 2012, 51(Suppl 6):vi5-9.[3]Zhao J, et al. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2014, 32(5):667-673.[4]Mimori T, et al. Mod Rheumatol 2019, 29(2):314-323.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document