Search

Although interindividual differences in narcissism are well studied, little is known about assessing narcissism at the within-person level. To fill this research gap, we investigated whether the narcissism construct is represented in the same way at the between- and within-person levels. We analyzed four established narcissism measures across multiple studies. In each of the studies, participants completed narcissism measures in ecological momentary assessment or daily diary studies. Equivalent construct representation across between- and within-person narcissism (i.e., cross-level measurement invariance) was found. State narcissism measures showed convergent validities for the trait narcissism scales. Moreover, we also found that antagonistic narcissism was most strongly related to within-person variability in narcissism. Our investigation sheds new light on the structure and assessment of narcissism on the within-person level by providing a comprehensive examination of its measurement.

While the objective level of intelligence is not associated with narcissism, relations to self-assessed intelligence (SAI) have been repeatedly reported. Existing research suggests that different facets of narcissism may have different associations with SAI. In the current daily diary study (N = 176; N = 3975 total observations), we employed dynamic structural equation modeling to examine the relationships between facets of trait and state narcissism (i.e., agentic, antagonistic, and neurotic) and the level, variability, and instability of SAI assessed over 28 consecutive days. Both trait and state narcissism were consistently related to SAI: agentic narcissism showed a positive relationship, whereas antagonistic and neurotic narcissism showed negative relationships with SAI. Trait agentic and state antagonistic narcissism predicted greater variability of SAI scores throughout the study, while neither trait nor state narcissism predicted the instability of SAI. Finally, we found that experiencing increased agentic narcissism on one day, predicted perceiving oneself as more intelligent on the next day, but feeling smarter did not predict feeling narcissistic over time. Moreover, we demonstrated that differentiating between narcissism facets yielded more theoretically accurate results compared to distinguishing between grandiose and vulnerable narcissism.

Responses to a measure of the four humor styles of affiliative, aggressive, self-enhancing, and self-defeating from the Humor Styles Questionnaire (HSQ; Martin et al. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(1), 48–75, 2003) were collected from individuals (N = 8361) in 28 countries encompassing 21 different languages. The purpose of this global collaboration was to examine both differences and similarities of humor styles across nations at the descriptive level. Across the countries, typically the highest scores were for the affiliative humor style. When each humor style was examined, some country samples demonstrated differences in mean scores. For example, the samples from Hungary, Indonesia, South Africa, and Serbia had high self-enhancing scores and Japan scored the lowest. In contrast to mean differences, almost all of the countries demonstrated positive inter-scale correlations, similar sex differences, and similar correlations with age, suggesting more similarities than differences. As discussed, some of the samples had low internal consistency values and poorly fitting factor structures for the humor style scales, suggesting that those results should be interpreted with caution. © 2019, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Background: Canakinumab, a fully human anti-IL-1β antibody has been shown to control inflammation in gouty arthritis. This study evaluated changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients treated with canakinumab or triamcinolone acetonide (TA). Methods: An 8-wk, dose-ranging, active controlled, single-blind study in patients (≥18 to ≤80 years) with acute gouty arthritis flare, refractory to or contraindicated to NSAlDs and/or colchicine, were randomized to canakinumab 10, 25, 50, 90, 150 mg sc or TA 40 mg im. HRQoL was assessed using patient reported outcomes evaluating PCS and MCS, and subscale scores of SF-36® [acute version 2]) and functional disability (HAQ-DI©). Results: In canakinumab 150 mg group, the most severe impairment at baseline was reported for physical functioning and bodily pain; levels of 41.5 and 36.0, respectively, which improved in 7 days to 80.0 and 72.2 (mean increases of 39.0 and 35.6) and at 8 wks improved to 86.1 and 86.6 (mean increases of 44.6 and 50.6); these were higher than levels seen in the general US population. TA group, showed less improvement in 7 days (mean increases of 23.3 and 21.3 for physical function and bodily pain). Functional disability scores, measured by the HAQ-DI© decreased in both treatment groups (Table 1). Conclusions: Gouty arthritis patients treated with canakinumab showed a rapid improvement in physical and mental well-being based on SF-36® scores. In contrast to the TA group, patients treated with canakinumab showed improvement in 7 days in physical function and bodily pain approaching levels of the general population. Disclosure statement: U.A., A.F., V.M., D.R., P.S. and K.S. are employees and shareholders of Novartis Pharma AG. A.P. has received research support from Novartis Pharma AG. N.S. has received research support and consultancy fees from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, has served on advisory boards for Novartis, Takeda, Savient, URL Pharma and EnzymeRx, and is/has been a member

Background: Rituximab (RTX) in combination with methotrexate (MTX) has been licensed since 2006 for the management of severe active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in patients who have failed at least one anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy. Published clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of RTX in improving both clinical symptoms and patients' physical function. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of RTX in RA patients treated in routine clinical practice by examining clinical and patient reported outcomes six months after receiving a first course of RTX. Methods: The analysis involved 550 RA patients registered with the BSRBR, who were starting RTX and were followed up for at least 6 months. Change in Disease Activity Score (DAS28) and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response were used to assess the clinical response while change in Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score was used to assess the physical function of the patients 6 months after starting RTX. The change in DAS28 and HAQ was compared between seronegative and seropositive patients and anti-TNF naïve patients versus anti-TNF failures. The response was also compared between patients receiving RTX in combination with MTX, other non-biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (nbDMARDs) or no nbDMARDs. Results: The mean (s.d.) age of the cohort was 59 (12) years and 78% of the patients were females. The patients had a mean (s.d.) of 15 (10) years of disease duration. 16% were biologic naïve while 84% were anti-TNF failures. 32% of the patients were seronegative and 68% were seropositive. The mean (95% CI) DAS28 at baseline was 6.2 (6.1, 6.3) which decreased to 4.8 (4.7, 4.9) at 6 months of follow up. 16% were EULAR good responders, 43% were moderate responders and 41% were non responders. The mean (95% CI) change in HAQ was −0.1 (−0.2, −0.1) (Table 1). The mean change in DAS28 was similar in seropositive and seronegative patients (p = 0.18) while the anti-TNF naïve

Contains fulltext : 70565.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), The 52-week Therapeutic Arthritis Research and Gastrointestinal Event Trial (TARGET) investigated the gastrointestinal and cardiovascular safety profile of lumiracoxib 400 mg once daily compared with 2 traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs): ibuprofen 800 mg 3 times daily and naproxen 500 mg twice daily. Data from TARGET were analyzed to examine the effect of lumiracoxib compared with ibuprofen and naproxen on blood pressure (BP), incidence of de novo and aggravated hypertension, prespecified edema events, and congestive heart failure. Lumiracoxib resulted in smaller changes in BP as early as week 4. Least-squares mean change from baseline at week 4 for systolic BP was +0.57 mm Hg with lumiracoxib compared with +3.14 mm Hg with ibuprofen (P<.0001) and +0.43 with lumiracoxib compared with +1.80 mm Hg with naproxen (P<.0001). In conclusion, the use of lumiracoxib and traditional NSAIDs results in differing BP changes; these might be of clinical relevance.

Contains fulltext : 57937.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access), BACKGROUND: The potential for cyclo-oxygenase 2 (COX2)-selective inhibitors to increase the risk for myocardial infarction is controversial. The Therapeutic Arthritis Research and Gastrointestinal Event Trial (TARGET) aimed to assess gastrointestinal and cardiovascular safety of the COX2 inhibitor lumiracoxib compared with two non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, naproxen and ibuprofen. METHODS: 18325 patients age 50 years or older with osteoarthritis were randomised to lumiracoxib 400 mg once daily (n=9156), naproxen 500 mg twice daily (4754), or ibuprofen 800 mg three times daily (4415) in two substudies of identical design. Randomisation was stratified for low-dose aspirin use and age. The primary cardiovascular endpoint was the Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration endpoint of non-fatal and silent myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death. Analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS: 81 (0.44%) patients did not start treatment and 7120 (39%) did not complete the study. At 1-year follow-up, incidence of the primary endpoint was low, both with lumiracoxib (59 events [0.65%]) and the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (50 events [0.55%]; hazard ratio 1.14 [95% CI 0.78-1.66], p=0.5074). Incidence of myocardial infarction (clinical and silent) in the overall population in the individual substudies was 0.38% with lumiracoxib (18 events) versus 0.21% with naproxen (ten) and 0.11% with lumiracoxib (five) versus 0.16% with ibuprofen (seven). In the naproxen substudy, rates of myocardial infarction (clinical and silent) did not differ significantly compared with lumiracoxib in the population not taking low-dose aspirin (hazard ratio 2.37 [95% CI 0.74-7.55], p=0.1454), overall (1.77 [0.82-3.84], p=0.1471), and in patients taking aspirin (1.36 [0.47-3.93], p=0.5658). In the ibuprofen substudy, these rates did not differ between lumiracoxib and ibuprofen in the population not taking low-dose aspirin (0.75 [0.20-2.79], p=0.6669), overall (0.66 [0.21-2.09]