Search

ObjectiveThe objective is to update recommendations for prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) for patients with rheumatic or nonrheumatic conditions receiving >3 months treatment with glucocorticoids (GCs) ≥2.5 mg daily.MethodsAn updated systematic literature review was performed for clinical questions on nonpharmacologic, pharmacologic treatments, discontinuation of medications, and sequential therapy. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A Voting Panel achieved ≥70% consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.ResultsFor adults beginning or continuing >3 months of GC treatment, we strongly recommend as soon as possible after initiation of GCs, initial assessment of fracture risks with clinical fracture assessment, bone mineral density with vertebral fracture assessment or spinal x-ray, and Fracture Risk Assessment Tool if ≥40 years old. For adults at medium, high, or very high fracture risk, we strongly recommend pharmacologic treatment. Choice of oral or intravenous bisphosphonates, denosumab, or parathyroid hormone analogs should be made by shared decision-making. Anabolic agents are conditionally recommended as initial therapy for those with high and very high fracture risk. Recommendations are made for special populations, including children, people with organ transplants, people who may become pregnant, and people receiving very high-dose GC treatment. New recommendations for both discontinuation of osteoporosis therapy and sequential therapies are included.ConclusionThis guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients making treatment decisions for management of GIOP. These recommendations should not be used to limit or deny access to therapies.

BackgroundDifferences in the distribution of individual-level clinical risk factors across regions do not fully explain the observed global disparities in COVID-19 outcomes. We aimed to investigate the associations between environmental and societal factors and country-level variations in mortality attributed to COVID-19 among people with rheumatic disease globally.MethodsIn this observational study, we derived individual-level data on adults (aged 18-99 years) with rheumatic disease and a confirmed status of their highest COVID-19 severity level from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance (GRA) registry, collected between March 12, 2020, and Aug 27, 2021. Environmental and societal factors were obtained from publicly available sources. The primary endpoint was mortality attributed to COVID-19. We used a multivariable logistic regression to evaluate independent associations between environmental and societal factors and death, after controlling for individual-level risk factors. We used a series of nested mixed-effects models to establish whether environmental and societal factors sufficiently explained country-level variations in death.Findings14 044 patients from 23 countries were included in the analyses. 10 178 (72·5%) individuals were female and 3866 (27·5%) were male, with a mean age of 54·4 years (SD 15·6). Air pollution (odds ratio 1·10 per 10 μg/m3 [95% CI 1·01-1·17]; p=0·0105), proportion of the population aged 65 years or older (1·19 per 1% increase [1·10-1·30]; p

PurposeThere is a critical need for genomic medicine research that reflects and benefits socioeconomically and ancestrally diverse populations. However, disparities in research populations persist, highlighting that traditional study designs and materials may be insufficient or inaccessible to all groups. New approaches can be gained through collaborations with patient/community stakeholders. Although some benefits of stakeholder engagement are recognized, routine incorporation into the design and implementation of genomics research has yet to be realized.MethodsThe National Institutes of Health-funded Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium required stakeholder engagement as a dedicated project component. Each CSER project planned and carried out stakeholder engagement activities with differing goals and expected outcomes. Examples were curated from each project to highlight engagement strategies and outcomes throughout the research lifecycle from development through dissemination.ResultsProjects tailored strategies to individual study needs, logistical constraints, and other challenges. Lessons learned include starting early with engagement efforts across project stakeholder groups and planned flexibility to enable adaptations throughout the project lifecycle.ConclusionEach CSER project used more than 1 approach to engage with relevant stakeholders, resulting in numerous adaptations and tremendous value added throughout the full research lifecycle. Incorporation of community stakeholder insight improves the outcomes and relevance of genomic medicine research.

ObjectivePatient-reported outcomes (PROs) are an integral part of treat-to-target approaches in managing rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In clinical practice, however, routine collection, documentation, and discussion of PROs with patients are highly variable. The RISE LC (Rheumatology Informatics System for Effectiveness Learning Collaborative) was established to develop and share best practices in PRO collection and use across adult rheumatology practices in the United States METHODS: The goals of the RISE LC were developed through site surveys and in-person meetings. Participants completed a baseline survey on PRO collection and use in their practices. RISE LC learning sessions focused on improving communication around PROs with patients and enhancing shared decision-making in treatment plans. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the RISE LC pivoted to adapt PRO tools for telehealth.ResultsAt baseline, all responding sites (n = 15) had established workflows for collecting PROs. Most sites used paper forms alone. PRO documentation in electronic health records was variable, with only half of the sites using structured data fields. To standardize and improve the use of PROs, participants iteratively developed a Clinical Disease Activity Index-based RA Disease Activity Communication Tool to solicit treatment goals and improve shared decision-making across sites. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated developing a tool to gauge PROs via telehealth.ConclusionThe RISE LC is a continuous, structured method for implementing strategies to improve PRO collection and use in rheumatological care, initially adapting from the Learning Collaborative model and extending to include features of a learning network. Future directions include measuring the impact of standardized PRO collection and discussion on shared decision-making and RA outcomes.

IntroductionImplementation of genome-scale sequencing in clinical care has significant challenges: the technology is highly dimensional with many kinds of potential results, results interpretation and delivery require expertise and coordination across multiple medical specialties, clinical utility may be uncertain, and there may be broader familial or societal implications beyond the individual participant. Transdisciplinary consortia and collaborative team science are well poised to address these challenges. However, understanding the complex web of organizational, institutional, physical, environmental, technologic, and other political and societal factors that influence the effectiveness of consortia is understudied. We describe our experience working in the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium, a multi-institutional translational genomics consortium.MethodsA key aspect of the CSER consortium was the juxtaposition of site-specific measures with the need to identify consensus measures related to clinical utility and to create a core set of harmonized measures. During this harmonization process, we sought to minimize participant burden, accommodate project-specific choices, and use validated measures that allow data sharing.ResultsIdentifying platforms to ensure swift communication between teams and management of materials and data were essential to our harmonization efforts. Funding agencies can help consortia by clarifying key study design elements across projects during the proposal preparation phase and by providing a framework for data sharing data across participating projects.ConclusionsIn summary, time and resources must be devoted to developing and implementing collaborative practices as preparatory work at the beginning of project timelines to improve the effectiveness of research consortia.

ObjectivesCOVID-19 outcomes in people with rheumatic diseases remain poorly understood. The aim was to examine demographic and clinical factors associated with COVID-19 hospitalisation status in people with rheumatic disease.MethodsCase series of individuals with rheumatic disease and COVID-19 from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance registry: 24 March 2020 to 20 April 2020. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate ORs and 95% CIs of hospitalisation. Age, sex, smoking status, rheumatic disease diagnosis, comorbidities and rheumatic disease medications taken immediately prior to infection were analysed.ResultsA total of 600 cases from 40 countries were included. Nearly half of the cases were hospitalised (277, 46%) and 55 (9%) died. In multivariable-adjusted models, prednisone dose ≥10 mg/day was associated with higher odds of hospitalisation (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.96). Use of conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) alone or in combination with biologics/Janus Kinase inhibitors was not associated with hospitalisation (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.17 and OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.46, respectively). Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use was not associated with hospitalisation status (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.06). Tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (anti-TNF) use was associated with a reduced odds of hospitalisation (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.81), while no association with antimalarial use (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.57) was observed.ConclusionsWe found that glucocorticoid exposure of ≥10 mg/day is associated with a higher odds of hospitalisation and anti-TNF with a decreased odds of hospitalisation in patients with rheumatic disease. Neither exposure to DMARDs nor NSAIDs were associated with increased odds of hospitalisation.

Objective: Quality of care (QoC) delivery in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) continues to suffer from various challenges (eg, delay in diagnosis and referral) that can lead to poor patient outcomes. This study aimed to identify good practice interventions that address these challenges in RA care in North America. Methods: The study was conducted in three steps: (1) literature review of existing publications and guidelines (April 2005 to April 2021) on QoC in RA; (2) in‐person visits to >50 individual specialists and health care professionals across nine rheumatology centers in the United States and Canada to identify challenges in RA care and any corresponding good practice interventions; and (3) collation and organization of findings of the two previous methods by commonalities to identify key good practice interventions, followed by further review by RA experts to ensure key challenges and gaps in RA care were captured. Results: Several challenges and eight good practice interventions were identified in RA care. The interventions were prioritized based on the perceived positive impact on the challenges in care and ease of implementation. High‐priority interventions included the use of technology to improve care, streamlining specialist treatment, and facilitating comorbidity assessment and care. Other interventions included enabling patient access to optimal medication regimens and improving patient self‐management strategies. Conclusion: Learnings from the study can be implemented in other rheumatology centers throughout North America to improve RA care. Although the study was completed before the COVID‐19 pandemic, the findings remain relevant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Osteoporosis treatment rates are declining, even among those with past fractures. Novel, low-cost approaches are needed to improve osteoporosis care. We conducted a parallel group, controlled, randomized clinical trial evaluating a behavioral intervention for improving osteoporosis medication use. A total of 2684 women with self-reported fracture history after age 45 years not using osteoporosis therapy from US Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW) sites were randomized 1:1 to receive a multimodal, tailored, direct-to-patient, video intervention versus usual care. The primary study outcome was self-report of osteoporosis medication use at 6 months. Other outcomes included calcium and vitamin D supplementation, bone mineral density (BMD) testing, readiness for behavioral change, and barriers to treatment. In intent-to-treat analyses, there were no significant differences between groups (intervention versus control) in osteoporosis medication use (11.7% versus 11.4%, p = 0.8), calcium supplementation (31.8% versus 32.6%, p = 0.7), vitamin D intake (41.3% versus 41.9%, p = 0.8), or BMD testing (61.8% versus 57.1%, p = 0.2). In the intervention group, fewer women were in the precontemplative stage of behavior change, more women reported seeing their primary care provider, had concerns regarding osteonecrosis of the jaw, and difficulty in taking/remembering to take osteoporosis medications. We found differences in BMD testing among the subgroup of women with no prior osteoporosis treatment, those who provided contact information, and those with no past BMD testing. In per protocol analyses, women with appreciable exposure to the online intervention (n = 257) were more likely to start nonbisphosphonates (odds ratio [OR] = 2.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-5.79) compared with the usual care group. Although our intervention did not increase the use of osteoporosis therapy at 6 months, it increased nonbisphosphonate medication use and BMD testing in select subgroups, shifted participants' readiness for behavior change, and altered perceptions of barriers to osteoporosis treatment. Achieving changes in osteoporosis care using patient activation approaches alone is challenging. © 2018 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

ObjectiveTo develop an innovative and effective educational intervention to inform patients about the need for osteoporosis treatment and to determine factors associated with its online uptake.MethodsPostmenopausal women with a prior fracture and not currently using osteoporosis therapy were eligible to be included in the Activating Patients at Risk for OsteoPOroSis (APROPOS). Four nominal groups with a total of 18 racially/ethnically diverse women identified osteoporosis treatment barriers. We used the Information, Motivation, Behavior Skills conceptual model to develop a direct-to-patient intervention to mitigate potentially modifiable barriers to osteoporosis therapy. The intervention included videos tailored by participants' race/ethnicity and their survey responses: ranked barriers to osteoporosis treatment, deduced barriers to treatment, readiness to behavior change, and osteoporosis treatment history. Videos consisted of "storytelling" narratives, based on osteoporosis patient experiences and portrayed by actresses of patient-identified race/ethnicity. We also delivered personalized brief phone calls followed by an interactive voice-response phone messages aimed to promote uptake of the videos.ResultsTo address the factors associated with online intervention uptake, we focused on participants assigned to the intervention arm (n = 1342). These participants were 92.9% Caucasian, with a mean (SD) age 74.9 (8.0) years and the majority (77.7%) had some college education. Preference for natural treatments was the barrier ranked #1 by most (n = 130; 27%), while concern about osteonecrosis of the jaw was the most frequently reported barrier (at any level; n = 322; 67%). Overall, 28.1% (n = 377) of participants in the intervention group accessed the videos online. After adjusting for relevant covariates, the participants who provided an email address had 6.07 (95% CI 4.53-8.14) higher adjusted odds of accessing their online videos compared to those who did not.ConclusionWe developed and implemented a novel tailored multi-modal intervention to improve initiation of osteoporosis therapy. An email address provided on the survey was the most important factor independently associated with accessing the intervention online. The design and uptake of this intervention may have implications for future studies in osteoporosis or other chronic diseases.

Objective: Black/African American women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) experience greater organ damage and at younger ages than white women. The objective of this study was to advance research on SLE inequities by identifying sociodemographic risk profiles associated with organ damage accrual specifically among Black/African American women. Methods: Latent profile analysis was conducted among 438 Black/African American women with SLE living in Atlanta, GA and enrolled in the Black Women's Experiences Living with Lupus (BeWELL) Study (May 2015 to April 2017). Proportional hazard and Poisson regression models examined prospective associations between sociodemographic profiles and the timing and degree of organ damage accrual over 2 years. Results: Four profiles emerged: (1) "Younger/Lower SES with Uncontrolled SLE" (44.8%), (2) "Older/Lower SES with Uncontrolled SLE" (23.3%), (3) "Mid-SES with Controlled SLE" (19.6%), and (4) "Higher SES with Controlled SLE" (11.2%). Approximately 42% of participants experienced new organ damage during the follow-up period. Proportional hazard models indicated that "Older/Lower SES with Uncontrolled SLE" participants were at greatest risk of new organ damage (HR = 2.41; 95% CI = 1.39, 4.19), followed by "Younger/Lower SES with Uncontrolled SLE" participants (HR = 1.56; 95% CI = 0.92, 2.67), compared to those in the "Higher SES with Controlled SLE" profile. Poisson regression models revealed that these two groups also exhibited greater organ damage accrual (b = 0.98, SE = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.52, 1.44 and b = 0.72, SE = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.27, 1.17, respectively). Conclusions: Black/African American women with fewer socioeconomic resources and uncontrolled SLE are at greatest risk for increasing disease severity over time. Social inequities likely contribute to racial inequities in SLE progression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]