Search

Objective: To provide recommendations for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with a focus on nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging, irrespective of JIA phenotype., Methods: We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations., Results: Recommendations in this guideline include the use of physical therapy and occupational therapy interventions; a healthy, well-balanced, age-appropriate diet; specific laboratory monitoring for medications; widespread use of immunizations; and shared decision-making with patients/caregivers. Disease management for all patients with JIA is addressed with respect to nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional., Conclusion: This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis, and a concurrent 2021 guideline on oligoarthritis, temporomandibular arthritis, and systemic JIA. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver., (© 2022 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To provide updated guidelines for pharmacologic management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), focusing on treatment of oligoarthritis, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthritis, and systemic JIA with and without macrophage activation syndrome. Recommendations regarding tapering and discontinuing treatment in inactive systemic JIA are also provided., Methods: We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations., Results: Similar to those published in 2019, these JIA recommendations are based on clinical phenotypes of JIA, rather than a specific classification schema. This guideline provides recommendations for initial and subsequent treatment of JIA with oligoarthritis, TMJ arthritis, and systemic JIA as well as for tapering and discontinuing treatment in subjects with inactive systemic JIA. Other aspects of disease management, including factors that influence treatment choice and medication tapering, are discussed. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional., Conclusion: This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver., (© 2022 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To provide recommendations for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with a focus on nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging, irrespective of JIA phenotype., Methods: We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations., Results: Recommendations in this guideline include the use of physical therapy and occupational therapy interventions; a healthy, well-balanced, age-appropriate diet; specific laboratory monitoring for medications; widespread use of immunizations; and shared decision-making with patients/caregivers. Disease management for all patients with JIA is addressed with respect to nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional., Conclusion: This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis, and a concurrent 2021 guideline on oligoarthritis, temporomandibular arthritis, and systemic JIA. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver., (© 2022 American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To provide updated guidelines for pharmacologic management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), focusing on treatment of oligoarthritis, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthritis, and systemic JIA with and without macrophage activation syndrome. Recommendations regarding tapering and discontinuing treatment in inactive systemic JIA are also provided., Methods: We developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations., Results: Similar to those published in 2019, these JIA recommendations are based on clinical phenotypes of JIA, rather than a specific classification schema. This guideline provides recommendations for initial and subsequent treatment of JIA with oligoarthritis, TMJ arthritis, and systemic JIA as well as for tapering and discontinuing treatment in subjects with inactive systemic JIA. Other aspects of disease management, including factors that influence treatment choice and medication tapering, are discussed. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional., Conclusion: This clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver., (© 2022 American College of Rheumatology.)

Background: We aimed to characterize etanercept (ETN) use in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients enrolled in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Registry., Methods: The CARRA Registry is a convenience cohort of patients with paediatric onset rheumatic diseases, including JIA. JIA patients treated with ETN for whom the month and year of ETN initiation were available were included. Patterns of ETN and methotrexate (MTX) use were categorized as follows: combination therapy (ETN and MTX started concurrently), step-up therapy (MTX started first and ETN added later), switchers (MTX started and then stopped when or before ETN started), MTX add-on (ETN started first and MTX added later), and ETN only (no MTX use). Data were described using parametric and non-parametric statistics as appropriate., Results: Two thousand thirty-two of the five thousand six hundred forty-one patients with JIA met inclusion criteria (74% female, median age at diagnosis 6.0 years [interquartile range 2.0, 11.0]. Most patients (66.9%) were treated with a non-biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD), primarily MTX, prior to ETN. There was significant variability in patterns of MTX use prior to starting ETN. Step-up therapy was the most common approach. Only 34.0% of persistent oligoarticular JIA patients continued treatment with a non-biologic DMARD 3 months or more after ETN initiation. ETN persistence overall was 66.3, 49.4, and 37.3% at 24, 36 and 48 months respectively. ETN persistence among spondyloarthritis patients (enthesitis related arthritis and psoriatic JIA) varied by MTX initiation pattern, with higher ETN persistence rates in those who initiated combination therapy (68.9%) and switchers/ETN only (73.3%) patients compared to step-up (65.4%) and MTX add-on (51.1%) therapy., Conclusion: This study characterizes contemporary patterns of ETN use in the CARRA Registry. Treatment was largely in keeping with American College of Rheumatology guidelines., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objectives: To investigate the burden of systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (SJIA) on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and resource use of patients and caregivers (families) on biologic therapy., Methods: This international study assessed SJIA burden in patients on biologics, using a caregiver questionnaire and retrospective chart review. Validated measures included: Child Health Questionnaire Parent-Form 50 (CHQ-PF50), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36v2) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI:SHP). Caregivers completed function, treatment satisfaction and resource utilisation questions., Results: Sixty-one biologic treated patients participated (12 anakinra, 25 canakinumab, 24 tocilizumab). Mean age at diagnosis and survey completion was 6.4 and 11.3 years, respectively. Mean (±SD: standard deviation) CHQ-PF50 physical (PhS) and psychosocial (PsS) summary scores were significantly lower in SJIA patients than a normative population (PhS: 40.0±18.2 vs. 53.0±8.8; PsS: 46.6±11.3 vs. 51.2±9.1) as was caregivers' mean SF-36v2 mental component score (MCS; 46.2±10.7 vs. 50.0±10). Assistive devices were required by 54%; 20% required home/car alterations. According to caregivers, biologic treatment completely improved SJIA symptoms in 48% on canakinumab or tocilizumab and 32% on anakinra. Over 2 months, patients missed 2.9 school days due to SJIA (10% yearly loss). Caregivers lost 25 work days annually and 27.5 days of productivity (WPAI-SHP: mean absenteeism 10%; presenteeism 11%). Yearly SJIA travel/treatment costs averaged $1,130., Conclusions: SJIA patients on biologic therapy experience HRQOL impairment, caregivers' mental well-being suffers and productivity losses and expenses are incurred. Therapeutic interventions that reduce the burden of SJIA are required.

The proven effectiveness of biologics and other immunomodulatory products in inflammatory rheumatic diseases has resulted in their widespread use as well as reports of potential short- and long-term complications such as infection and malignancy. These complications are especially worrisome in children who often have serial exposures to multiple immunomodulatory products. Post-marketing surveillance of immunomodulatory products in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and pediatric systemic lupus erythematosus is currently based on product-specific registries and passive surveillance, which may not accurately reflect the safety risks for children owing to low numbers, poor long-term retention, and inadequate comparators. In collaboration with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), patient and family advocacy groups, biopharmaceutical industry representatives and other stakeholders, the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) and the Duke Clinical Research Institute (DCRI) have developed a novel pharmacosurveillance model (CARRA Consolidated Safety Registry [CoRe]) based on a multicenter longitudinal pediatric rheumatic diseases registry with over 8000 participants. The existing CARRA infrastructure provides access to much larger numbers of subjects than is feasible in single-product registries. Enrollment regardless of medication exposure allows more accurate detection and evaluation of safety signals. Flexibility built into the model allows the addition of specific data elements and safety outcomes, and designation of appropriate disease comparator groups relevant to each product, fulfilling post-marketing requirements and commitments. The proposed model can be applied to other pediatric and adult diseases, potentially transforming the paradigm of pharmacosurveillance in response to the growing public mandate for rigorous post-marketing safety monitoring.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of duration of untreated symptoms in children with juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM) on clinical and laboratory status at diagnosis., Study Design: We examined physical and laboratory data from the first physician visit for 166 untreated children with JDM. Disease activity scores (DASs) assessed skin and muscle involvement. Height and weight were compared with the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III dataset. Duration of untreated illness was designated as the time from first sign of rash or weakness to diagnostic visit., Results: Boys and girls with untreated JDM were shorter and lighter than national norms (P > .0005 for both), and nonwhite children were weaker than white children (P > .0005). Older children had more dysphagia (P = .017) and arthritis (P > .001). Duration of untreated JDM was negatively associated with DAS weakness (P > .0005), unrelated to DAS skin, and positively associated with pathological calcifications (P = .006). With untreated disease > or = 4.7 months, serum levels of 4 muscle enzymes (aldolase, lactic dehydrogenase, creatine kinase, serum glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase/aspartate aminotransferase) tended toward normal (P > .01 for each)., Conclusions: Duration of untreated symptoms is an important variable and should be included in decisions concerning both diagnostic criteria and intensity of therapy for children with JDM.