Search

[No Abstract Available] AbbVieAbbVie The design, study conduct, and financial support for the study were provided by AbbVie. AbbVie participated in the interpretation of data, review, and approval of the publication. All authors have received research funding for this study. The authors wish to thank B. Murat Ozdemir of Monitor CRO for medical editing and reviewing services of this manuscript. AbbVie provided funding to Monitor CRO for this work.

Background: In many countries, JAK-inhibitors (JAKi) have only recently been approved as treatment for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of JAKi compared to bDMARDs in RA patients in the real-world population in an international collaboration of registers (the textquotedblleftJAK-pottextquotedblright collaboration).Methods: Patients initiating either JAKi, TNFi, IL-6i or abatacept (ABA) during a time period when JAKi were available in each country (19 registers, Table) were included. We compared the effectiveness of JAKi and bDMARDs in terms of retention using crude and adjusted survival analysis. Missing covariates were imputed using multiple imputation.Results: Among 25521 included patients, 6063 initiated a JAKi, 13879 a TNFi, 2348 ABA, and 3231 an IL-6i. Patients were on average 55 years old, with a mean disease duration 10 years, mostly seropositive (67, female (77 and with moderate disease activity at treatment initiation. The main reason of stopping treatment was ineffectiveness (49, followed by adverse events (21. Patients on JAKi were treated more often as monotherapy, had higher CRP and disease activity at baseline and had experienced more previous ts/bDMARDs. Crude median retention was 1.4 (95.2-1.5) years for JAKi, 1.6 (1.6-1.7) for TNFi, 1.5 (1.3-1.7) for IL6i and 1.1 (1.0-1.3) for ABA. After adjustment, the hazard ratio (HR) for discontinuation tended to be lower for JAKi (HR 0.86 (0.65-1.13)) compared to TNFi, but comparable for ABA (1.02 (0.94-1.10)) and IL6i (0.99 (0.88-1.10)) (Figure 1). HRs differed notably between countries (Figure 2).View this table:Table 1. RegistersConclusion: The adjusted overall drug retention of JAKi tended to be higher than for TNFi, with large variation between countries. Other measures of effectiveness, such as the evaluation of CDAI remission and low disease activity are planned to shape a more comprehensive picture of JAKi effectiveness in the real world.Disclosure of Interests: Kim Lauper: None declared, Denis Mongin: None declared, Sytske Anne Bergstra: None declared, Denis Choquette Grant/research support from: Rhumadata is supported by grants from Pfizer, Amgen, Abbvie, Gylead, BMS, Novartis, Sandoz, eli Lilly,, Consultant of: Pfizer, Amgen, Abbvie, Gylead, BMS, Novartis, Sandoz, eli Lilly,, Speakers bureau: Pfizer, Amgen, Abbvie, Gylead, BMS, Novartis, Sandoz, eli Lilly,, Catalin Codreanu Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Accord Healthcare, Alfasigma, Egis, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Genesis, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Accord Healthcare, Alfasigma, Egis, Eli Lilly, Ewopharma, Genesis, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Diederik De Cock: None declared, Lene Dreyer: None declared, Ori Elkayam Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Novartis, Jansen, Kimme Hyrich Grant/research support from: Pfizer, UCB, BMS, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Florenzo Iannone Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, MSD, Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, UCB, MSD, Nevsun Inanc: None declared, Eirik kristianslund: None declared, Tore K. Kvien Grant/research support from: Received grants from Abbvie, Hospira/Pfizer, MSD and Roche (not relevant for this abstract)., Consultant of: Have received personal fees from Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lily, Hospira/Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Orion Pharma, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Sanofi and Mylan (not relevant for this abstract)., Paid instructor for: Have received personal fees from Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lily, Hospira/Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Orion Pharma, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Sanofi and Mylan (not relevant for this abstract)., Speakers bureau: Have received personal fees from Abbvie, Biogen, BMS, Celltrion, Eli Lily, Hospira/Pfizer, MSD, Novartis, Orion Pharma, Roche, Sandoz, UCB, Sanofi and Mylan (not relevant for this abstract)., Burkhard Leeb Grant/research support from: chairman of BioReg, Consultant of: AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, Lilly, Grünenthal, Gebro,, Paid instructor for: Lilly, Biogen, Speakers bureau: Biogen, Lilly, Pfizer, Grünenthal, Astropharma,, Galina Lukina Speakers bureau: Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Abbvie, Biocad, MSD, Roche, Dan Nordström Consultant of: Abbvie, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB., Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB., Karel Pavelka Consultant of: Abbvie, MSD, BMS, Egis, Roche, UCB, Medac, Pfizer, Biogen, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, MSD, BMS, Egis, Roche, UCB, Medac, Pfizer, Biogen, Manuel Pombo-Suarez Consultant of: Janssen, Lilly, MSD and Sanofi., Speakers bureau: Janssen, Lilly, MSD and Sanofi., Ziga Rotar Consultant of: Speaker and consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi., Speakers bureau: Speaker and consulting fees from Abbvie, Amgen, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Medis, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi., Maria Jose Santos Speakers bureau: Novartis and Pfizer, Anja Strangfeld Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Delphine Courvoisier: None declared, Axel Finckh Grant/research support from: Pfizer: Unrestricted research grant, Eli-Lilly: Unrestricted research grant, Consultant of: Sanofi, AB2BIO, Abbvie, Pfizer, MSD, Speakers bureau: Sanofi, Pfizer, Roche, Thermo Fisher Scientific

OBJECTIVES: The aim is to assess the prevalence of comorbidities and to further analyse to which degree fatigue can be explained by comorbidity burden, disease activity, disability and gross domestic product (GDP) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Nine thousands eight hundred seventy-four patients from 34 countries, 16 with high GDP (>24.000 US dollars [USD] per capita) and 18 low-GDP countries (6.6) compared with 23.0% in high-GDP countries (p

Objective. To assess the performance of the new 2012 provisional European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ American College of Rheumatology (ACR) polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) clinical classification criteria in discriminating PMR from other mimicking conditions compared with the previous 5 diagnostic criteria in a multicenter prospective study. Methods. Patients older than 50 years, presenting with new-onset bilateral shoulder pain with elevated acute-phase reactants (APR), were assessed for the fulfillment of the new and old classification/diagnostic criteria sets for PMR. At the end of the 1-year followup, 133 patients were diagnosed with PMR (expert opinion) and 142 with non-PMR conditions [69 rheumatoid arthritis (RA)]. Discriminating capacity, sensitivity, and specificity of the criteria sets were estimated. Results. Discriminating capacity of the new clinical criteria for PMR from non-PMR conditions and RA as estimated by area under the curve (AUC) were good with AUC of 0.736 and 0.781, respectively. The new criteria had a sensitivity of 89.5% and a specificity of 57.7% when tested against all non-PMR cases. When tested against all RA, seropositive RA, seronegative RA, and non-RA control patients, specificity changed to 66.7%, 100%, 20.7%, and 49.3%, respectively. Except for the Bird criteria, the 4 previous criteria had lower sensitivity and higher specificity (ranging from 83%-93%) compared with the new clinical criteria in discriminating PMR from all other controls. Conclusion. The new 2012 EULAR/ ACR clinical classification criteria for PMR is highly sensitive; however, its ability to discriminate PMR from other inflammatory/noninflammatory shoulder conditions, especially from seronegative RA, is not adequate. Imaging and other modifications such as cutoff values for APR might increase the specificity of the criteria.

Background: Adult-onset Still's disease (AOSD) is a rare condition, and treatment choices are frequently dependent on expert opinions. The objectives of the present study were to assess treatment modalities, disease course, and the factors influencing the outcome of patients with AOSD. Methods: A multicenter study was used to reach sufficient patient numbers. The diagnosis of AOSD was based on the Yamaguchi criteria. The data collected included patient age, gender, age at the time of diagnosis, delay time for the diagnosis, typical AOSD rash, arthralgia, arthritis, myalgia, sore throat, lymphadenopathy, hepatomegaly, splenomegaly, pleuritic, pericarditis, and other rare findings. The laboratory findings of the patients were also recorded. The drugs initiated after the establishment of a diagnosis and the induction of remission with the first treatment was recorded. Disease patterns and related factors were also investigated. A multivariate analysis was performed to assess the factors related to remission. Results: The initial data of 356 patients (210 females; 59%) from 19 centers were evaluated. The median age at onset was 32 (16-88) years, and the median follow-up time was 22 months (0-180). Fever (95.8%), arthralgia (94.9%), typical AOSD rash (66.9%), arthritis (64.6%), sore throat (63.5%), and myalgia (52.8%) were the most frequent clinical features. It was found that 254 of the 306 patients (83.0%) displayed remission with the initial treatment, including corticosteroids plus methotrexate with or without other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. The multivariate analysis revealed that the male sex, delayed diagnosis of more than 6 months, failure to achieve remission with initial treatment, and arthritis involving wrist/elbow joints were related to the chronic disease course. Conclusion: Induction of remission with initial treatment was achieved in the majority of AOSD patients. Failure to achieve remission with initial treatment as well as a delayed diagnosis implicated a chronic disease course in AOSD. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Objectives. The aim of this prospective study was to detect minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) of oral health impact profile-14 (OHIP-14) for assessing the effect of treatments for oral ulcers in Behçet's disease (BD). Methods. BD patients with active oral ulcers (F/M:36/22) were selected. Baseline and follow-up data were collected by clinical examinations and questionnaires. Patients rated their global impression of change (PGIC) measured by a transitional question. MCII was defined as the difference in mean change from baseline in OHIP-14 between patients with no response to therapy and patients with next higher level of response. Results. Approximately one third (29.3 %) of the patients expressed an improvement during control examinations. A significant correlation was observed between raw change in OHIP-14 score and change in number of oral ulcers (r=0.69 p=0.017). Inactive patients increased from 44.1 % in baseline to 58.8% in follow-up examination. A trend towards decreased number of oral ulcers was observed in follow-up (0.64±0.93) compared to baseline (1.44±1.92) in the improved group (p=0.096). According to regression analysis, PGIC was a significant predictor of change in raw OHIP-14 score. The threshold levels generated from the ROC analyses in OHIP-14 score best associated with clinically important improvement were -3.5 points (sensitivity: 80%, specificity: 88.6%) and -38.1% (sensitivity: 86.7%, specificity: 97.1%) respectively. Conclusion. Changes in OHIP-14 scores seem to be a sensitive and valuable tool for the determination of MCII during follow-up of Behçet's disease patients for oral disease assessment. © Copyright Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 2009.

Objective Interleukin I (IL-1) family is composed of two agonists, IL-1 alpha and IL-1 beta and IL-1 receptor antagonist, IL-1Ra. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between polymorphisms of IL-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1RN), IL-1B promoter and IL-1B exon 5 genes and susceptibility to rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Turkish population.