scholarly journals The use of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs for inflammatory arthritis in Korea: results of a Korean Expert Consensus

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-59
Author(s):  
Eun-Jung Park ◽  
Hyungjin Kim ◽  
Seung Min Jung ◽  
Yoon-Kyoung Sung ◽  
Han Joo Baek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Expert Consensus ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Disease Modifying

scholarly journals Safety Profile of Biologics Used in Rheumatology: An Italian Prospective Pharmacovigilance Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 1227 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Antonietta Barbieri ◽  
Giuseppe Cicala ◽  
Paola Maria Cutroneo ◽  
Elisabetta Gerratana ◽  
Caterina Palleria ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Gastrointestinal Disease ◽  
Risk Profile ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
Post Marketing Surveillance ◽  
Post Marketing ◽  
Disease Modifying

Post-marketing surveillance activities are essential to detect the risk/benefit profile of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in inflammatory arthritis. The aim of this study was to evaluate adverse events (AEs) in patients treated with bDMARDs in rheumatology during a prospective pharmacovigilance study from 2016 to 2018. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed to evaluate bDMARDs-related variables of patients without AEs/failures vs patients with AEs and failures. The risk profile among biologics was assessed by comparing patients treated with each bDMARD to patients treated with etanercept. A total of 1155 patients were enrolled, mostly affected by rheumatoid arthritis (46.0%). AEs and failures were experienced by 8.7% and 23.3%, respectively. The number of comorbidities significantly influenced the onset of AEs, while anxiety-depressive, gastrointestinal disease, and fibromyalgia influenced onset of failures. The probability of developing an AE was significantly lower in patients treated with secukinumab, while the probability of developing treatment failure was significantly lower in patients treated with golimumab, secukinumab and tocilizumab. A total of 216 AEs were reported (25.5% serious), mostly regarding infections (21.8%), musculoskeletal (17.6%) and skin (16.2%) disorders. Serious AEs included neutropenia (12.7%), lymphocytosis (9.1%) and uveitis (7.3%). The obtained results revealed known AEs but real-world data should be endorsed for undetected safety concerns.

scholarly journals Risk of harm in synthetic and biological intervention trials in patients with inflammatory arthritis: protocol for a metaepidemiological study focusing on contextual factors

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. e049850
Author(s):  
Esben Malm ◽  
Sabrina Mai Nielsen ◽  
Johannes Berg ◽  
John P. A. Ioannidis ◽  
Daniel Furst ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Contextual Factors ◽  
Population Characteristics ◽  
Randomised Trials ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Disease Modifying

IntroductionInflammatory arthritis (IA) conditions, including rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis, are characterised by inflammatory infiltration of the joints. Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (tsDMARDs), respectively, reduce the effects of proinflammatory cytokines and immune cells to ameliorate disease. However, immunosuppression can be associated with high rates of serious adverse events (SAEs), including serious infections, and maybe an increased risk of malignancies and cardiovascular events. Currently, there is no empirical evidence on the extent to which contextual factors and risk of bias (RoB) domains may modify these harm signals in randomised trials.Methods and analysisWe will search MEDLINE (via PubMed) for systematic reviews published since April 2015 and all Cochrane reviews. From these reviews, randomised trials will be eligible if they include patients with an IA condition with at least one group randomly allocated to bDMARD and/or tsDMARD treatments. A predefined form will be used for extracting data on population characteristics (eg, baseline characteristics or eligibility criteria, such as medication background) and specific harm outcome measures, such as number of withdrawals, numbers of patients discontinuing due to adverse events and number of patients having SAEs. RoB in individual trials will be assessed using a modified Cochrane RoB tool. We will estimate the potentially causal harm effects related to the experimental intervention compared with control comparator as risk ratios, and heterogeneity across randomised comparisons will be assessed statistically and evaluated as inconsistency using the I2 Index. Our metaregression analyses will designate population and trial characteristics and each RoB domain as independent variables, whereas the three harm domains will serve as dependent variables.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this study. Results will be disseminated through publication in international peer-reviewed journals.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020171124.

scholarly journals COVID-19: An Emerging Culprit of Inflammatory Arthritis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Muhammad Shariq Mukarram ◽  
Muhammad Ishaq Ghauri ◽  
Sehrish Sethar ◽  
Nasir Afsar ◽  
Amir Riaz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Rheumatic Disease ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Rheumatic Manifestations ◽  
Musculoskeletal Manifestations ◽  
Disease Modifying

Arthralgia is one of the most common symptoms that occur in patients with COVID-19. About 15% of patients present with arthralgia at some point. Although COVID-19 seems to attack the musculoskeletal system (muscles and joints) in its infective and postinfective stage causing inflammatory arthritis, not much is known about the rheumatic manifestations of this infection. In this case series of 5 patients, we discuss the occurrence of bilaterally symmetrical polyarthritis in patients, previously free from any rheumatic disease, after encountering COVID-19 infection. The musculoskeletal manifestations in these patients phenotypically resembled rheumatoid arthritis. These patients were treated successfully with low-dose glucocorticoids and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

scholarly journals Use of Disease-modifying Antirheumatic Drugs for Inflammatory Arthritis in US Veterans: Effect of Specialty Care and Geographic Distance

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 430-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica A. Walsh ◽  
Shaobo Pei ◽  
Zachary Burningham ◽  
Gopi Penmetsa ◽  
Grant W. Cannon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Geographic Distance ◽  
Veterans Affairs ◽  
Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Antirheumatic Drugs ◽  
Biologic Dmard ◽  
Disease Modifying ◽  
Us Veterans

Objective.To evaluate the effect of access to and distance from rheumatology care on the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) in US veterans with inflammatory arthritis (IA).Methods.Provider encounters and DMARD dispensations for IA (rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis) were evaluated in national Veterans Affairs (VA) datasets between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015.Results.Among 12,589 veterans with IA, 23.5% saw a rheumatology provider. In the general IA population, 25.3% and 13.6% of veterans were exposed to a synthetic DMARD (sDMARD) and biologic DMARD (bDMARD), respectively. DMARD exposure was 2.6- to 3.4-fold higher in the subpopulation using rheumatology providers, compared to the general IA population. The distance between veterans’ homes and the closest VA rheumatology site was < 40 miles (Near) for 55.9%, 40–99 miles (Intermediate) for 31.7%, and ≥ 100 miles (Far) for 12.4%. Veterans in the Intermediate and Far groups were less likely to see a rheumatology provider than veterans in the Near group (RR = 0.72 and RR = 0.49, respectively). Exposure to bDMARD was 34% less frequent in the Far group than the Near group. In the subpopulation who used rheumatology care, the bDMARD exposure discrepancy did not persist between distance groups.Conclusion.Use of rheumatology care and DMARD was low for veterans with IA. DMARD exposure was strongly associated with rheumatology care use. Veterans in the general IA population living far from rheumatology sites accessed rheumatology care and bDMARD less frequently than veterans living close to rheumatology sites.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document