scholarly journals Leflunomide as a Corticosteroid-Sparing Agent in Giant Cell Arteritis and Polymyalgia Rheumatica: A Case Series

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas P. Diamantopoulos ◽  
Helene Hetland ◽  
Geirmund Myklebust

Objectives. Giant cell arteritis (GCA) and polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) affect individuals older than 50 years of age and corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment. The aim of our study was to explore the role of leflunomide as a corticosteroid-sparing agent in GCA and PMR patients.Methods. Patients with difficult-to-treat GCA and PMR were retrospectively identified in the period from 2010 to 2013. The doses of corticosteroids and CRP values were noted before, after three months, and at the end of the treatment with leflunomide (for patients continuing treatment, censoring date was January 1, 2013).Results. Twenty-three patients were identified (12 with PMR and 11 with GCA). A reduction of 6 mg/dL (CI 95% –10.9–34.2,P=0.05) in CRP and 3.7 mg (CI 95% 0.5–7.0,P=0.03) in prednisolone dose was observed in the PMR group. In GCA patients, the reduction was 12.4 mg/dL (CI 95% 0.7–25.5,P=0.06) in CRP and 6.6 mg (CI 95% 2.8–10.3,P<0.01) in prednisolone dose.Conclusion. Leflunomide seems to be effective as a corticosteroid-sparing agent in patients with difficult-to-treat GCA and PMR. Randomized controlled trials are warranted in order to confirm the usefulness of leflunomide in the therapy of GCA/PMR.

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 652.2-652
Author(s):  
K. Bugdayli ◽  
P. Ungprasert ◽  
K. J. Warrington ◽  
M. Koster

Background:Visual ischemia (VI) is one of the most feared complications in giant cell arteritis (GCA). While the frequencies of VI development at or near diagnosis are better studied, limited information is available regarding the frequency of VI during relapse.Objectives:The purpose of this study was to characterize the frequency of visual ischemia (VI) as a manifestation of relapse or during follow-up in patients with GCA through performance of a systematic literature review.Methods:Potentially eligible studies were identified from Medline and EMBASE databases from inception to November 31, 2019 using a search strategy that comprised of terms for “giant cell arteritis,” “temporal arteritis,” or “Horton’s disease,” with “relapse,” “recurrence,” “flare,” “outcome,” “follow-up,” or “prognosis.” VI was defined as transient or permanent, full or partial, monocular or binocular visual field loss. VI occurring within 4 wks of GCA diagnosis was considered due to active disease and not included as a relapse event. Inclusion criteria used: (1) original research reported in English, (2) GCA definition provided, (3) VI outcome described as one of the following: (a) relapse rate/frequency denoting the presence or absence of VI, or (b) absolute number of VI events (> 4 weeks after GCA diagnosis) even if total cohort relapse rate/frequency was not provided. In order to reduce bias from under-reporting of negative results, studies that reported relapse rates/frequencies with accompanying relapse characteristics but did not provide initial detail regarding the presence/absence of VI were also identified. In such circumstances, the primary authors were directly contacted for patient-level data regarding VI and these studies were included in the final analysis if such data were available and provided.Results:A total of 913 unique articles were identified and underwent screening. Among these, 148 articles underwent independent full-text review by two physicians (K.B. and M.J.K). 33 articles met full inclusion criteria and an additional 21 articles included data on relapse but did not report VI patient data in the publication. Responses were received from authors of 11 of these 21 studies allowing for inclusion. 44 studies accounting for 3,649 patients with GCA were identified. Average percentage of baseline VI was 19% (range 0-66%). The average length of follow-up was 3.4 years (range 0.4 to 8.7). VI developing > 4 weeks after GCA diagnosis was recorded in a total of 53 patients (1.5%).Study-defined relapses were reported in 36 studies. A total of 1,215 patients with at least one or more relapses were recorded among 2,592 patients under observation (47%). Among these 36 studies, VI occurred in 37 patients (3.0%) with at least one study defined relapse event.Comparing trial design, retrospective studies (n=25) reported 27 of 2,718 (1%) patients developed VI during follow-up whereas 19 of 541 (3.5%) patients in randomized controlled trials (n=8) developed VI during the trial or post-trial follow-up.Conclusion:This report outlines the first systematic review evaluating VI as a manifestation of relapse and during follow-up in GCA. Overall, VI > 4 weeks after GCA diagnosis is uncommon (1.5%) but is noted in up to 3% of patients with at least one relapse event. Frequencies of reported VI were 3.5 times higher in randomized controlled trials compared to retrospective studies.Disclosure of Interests:Kubra Bugdayli: None declared, Patompong Ungprasert: None declared, Kenneth J Warrington Grant/research support from: Financial support for research from Kiniksa, Eli Lilly, Matthew Koster: None declared


QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
K Shah ◽  
D Saxena ◽  
D Mavalankar

Abstract Objective: Current meta-analysis aims to understand the effect of oral supplementation of vitamin D on intensive care unit (ICU) requirement and mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Methods: Databases PubMed, preprint servers, and google scholar were searched from December 2019 to December 2020. Authors searched for the articles assessing role of vitamin D supplementation on COVID-19. Cochrane RevMan tool was used for quantitative assessment of the data, where heterogeneity was assessed using I2 and Q statistics and data was expressed using odds ratio with 95% confidence interval. Results: Final meta-analysis involved pooled data of 532 hospitalized patients (189 on vitamin D supplementation and 343 on usual care/placebo) of COVID-19 from three studies (Two randomized controlled trials, one retrospective case-control study). Statistically (p&lt;0.0001) lower ICU requirement was observed in patients with vitamin D supplementation as compared to patients without supplementations (odds ratio: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.210-0.626). However, it suffered from significant heterogeneity, which reduced after sensitivity analysis. In case of mortality, vitamin D supplements has comparable findings with placebo treatment/usual care (odds ratio: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.413-2.113; p=0.87). The studies did not show any publication bias and had fair quality score. Subgroup analysis could not be performed due to limited number of studies and hence dose and duration dependent effect of vitamin D could not be evaluated. Conclusions: Although the current meta-analysis findings indicate potential role of vitamin D in improving COVID-19 severity in hospitalized patients, more robust data from randomized controlled trials are needed to substantiate its effects on mortality.


2015 ◽  
Vol 67 (10) ◽  
pp. 2555-2556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel H. Solomon ◽  
Michael E. Weinblatt ◽  
Richard J. Bucala

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 357-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meghan Dermody ◽  
Marlin W Schul ◽  
Thomas F O’Donnell

Objective Portions of these data were presented in a poster at the XVII World Meeting of the International Union of Phlebology, 8–13 September 2013, Boston, MA, USA. We assessed the incidence of venous thromboembolism following treatment of great saphenous insufficiency by endovenous thermal ablation or foam sclerotherapy using meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials and case series. Methods Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Clinical Trials Registry databases were searched from January 2000 through January 2013 for randomized controlled trials and large case series employing endovenous thermal ablation or foam sclerotherapy as a single modality for the treatment of great saphenous insufficiency, with concomitant postoperative duplex scanning. Pooled (stratified) incidence of venous thromboembolism with 95% confidence intervals was estimated using the DerSimonian–Laird procedure for random effects meta-analysis. A bootstrap analysis was performed to examine between-modality differences. Results Twelve randomized controlled trials and 19 case series investigating endovenous thermal ablation (radiofrequency ablation with VNUS/Covidien ClosureFAST™ catheter only, endovenous laser ablation, or both) were included. Data from 12 randomized controlled trials and 6 case series investigating nonproprietary foam preparations were analyzed. Estimated incidence of venous thromboembolism was low (mostly <1%) and similar across treatment modalities and study types. Conclusions Treatment of great saphenous insufficiency by endovenous thermal ablation or foam sclerotherapy is a common vascular intervention. The stratified incidence of venous thromboembolism appears to be low as reported in both randomized controlled trials and case series investigating these modalities. Although duplex scans were obtained postoperatively, a minority of studies specified protocols for venous thromboembolism detection.


2006 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 402-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Limpus ◽  
Wendy Chaboyer ◽  
Ellen McDonald ◽  
Lukman Thalib

• Objective To systematically review the randomized trials, observational studies, and survey evidence on compression and pneumatic devices for thromboprophylaxis in intensive care patients. • Methods Published studies on the use of compression and pneumatic devices in intensive care patients were assessed. A meta-analysis was conducted by using the randomized controlled trials. • Results A total of 21 relevant studies (5 randomized controlled trials, 13 observational studies, and 3 surveys) were found. A total of 811 patients were randomized in the 5 randomized controlled trials; 3421 patients participated in the observational studies. Trauma patients only were enrolled in 4 randomized controlled trials and 4 observational studies. Meta-analysis of 2 randomized controlled trials with similar populations and outcomes revealed that use of compression and pneumatic devices did not reduce the incidence of venous thromboembolism. The pooled risk ratio was 2.37, indicative of favoring the control over the intervention in reducing the deep venous thrombosis; however, the 95% CI of 0.57 to 9.90 indicated no significant differences between the intervention and the control. A range of methodological issues, including bias and confounding variables, make meaningful interpretation of the observational studies difficult. • Conclusions The limited evidence suggests that use of compressive and pneumatic devices yields results not significantly different from results obtained with no treatment or use of low-molecular-weight heparin. Until large randomized controlled trials are conducted, the role of mechanical approaches to thromboprophylaxis for intensive care patients remains uncertain.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document