Pediatric patient with systemic lupus erythematosus & congenital acquired immunodeficiency syndrome: An unusual case and a review of the literature

The coexistence of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in patients with congenital human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection is rare. This is a case report of a child diagnosed with SLE at nine years of age. She initially did well on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents, hydroxychloroquine, and steroids. She then discontinued her anti-lupus medications and was lost to follow-up. At 13 years of age, her lupus symptoms had resolved and she presented with intermittent fevers, cachexia, myalgias, arthralgias, and respiratory symptoms. Through subsequent investigations, the patient was ultimately diagnosed with congenitally acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS)

Safety of celecoxib and nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results of the phase 4 registry

Background This study aimed to assess long-term safety and developmental data on juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients treated in routine clinical practice with celecoxib or nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (nsNSAIDs). Methods Children aged ≥2 to \u3c18 years with rheumatoid-factor–positive or –negative polyarthritis, persistent or extended oligoarthritis, or systemic arthritis were enrolled into this prospective, observational, multicenter standard-of-care registry. Eligible patients were newly or recently prescribed (≤6 months) an nsNSAID or celecoxib. Enrolled patients were followed to the end of the study, whether they remained on the original NSAID, switched, or discontinued therapy altogether. All adverse events (AEs) regardless of severity were captured in the database. Results A total of 274 patients (nsNSAID, n = 219; celecoxib, n = 55) were observed for 410 patient-years of observation. Naproxen, meloxicam, and nabumetone were the most frequently used nsNSAIDs. At baseline, the celecoxib group was older, had a numerically longer median time since diagnosis, and a numerically higher proportion of patients with a history of gastrointestinal-related NSAID intolerance. AEs reported were those frequently observed with NSAID treatment and were similar across groups (nsNSAIDs: 52.0%; celecoxib: 52.9%). Twelve unique patients experienced a total of 18 serious AEs; the most frequent were infections, and none was attributed to NSAID use. Conclusions The safety profile of celecoxib and nsNSAIDs appears similar overall. The results from this registry, ongoing pharmacovigilance, and the phase 3 trial that led to the approval of celecoxib for children with JIA provide evidence that the benefit-risk for celecoxib treatment in JIA remains positive

Safety of celecoxib and nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: results of the phase 4 registry

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess long-term safety and developmental data on juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients treated in routine clinical practice with celecoxib or nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (nsNSAIDs). METHODS: Children aged ≥2 to <18 years with rheumatoid-factor–positive or –negative polyarthritis, persistent or extended oligoarthritis, or systemic arthritis were enrolled into this prospective, observational, multicenter standard-of-care registry. Eligible patients were newly or recently prescribed (≤6 months) an nsNSAID or celecoxib. Enrolled patients were followed to the end of the study, whether they remained on the original NSAID, switched, or discontinued therapy altogether. All adverse events (AEs) regardless of severity were captured in the database. RESULTS: A total of 274 patients (nsNSAID, n = 219; celecoxib, n = 55) were observed for 410 patient-years of observation. Naproxen, meloxicam, and nabumetone were the most frequently used nsNSAIDs. At baseline, the celecoxib group was older, had a numerically longer median time since diagnosis, and a numerically higher proportion of patients with a history of gastrointestinal-related NSAID intolerance. AEs reported were those frequently observed with NSAID treatment and were similar across groups (nsNSAIDs: 52.0%; celecoxib: 52.9%). Twelve unique patients experienced a total of 18 serious AEs; the most frequent were infections, and none was attributed to NSAID use. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of celecoxib and nsNSAIDs appears similar overall. The results from this registry, ongoing pharmacovigilance, and the phase 3 trial that led to the approval of celecoxib for children with JIA provide evidence that the benefit-risk for celecoxib treatment in JIA remains positive. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00688545

Developing a standardized approach to the assessment of pain in children and youth presenting to pediatric rheumatology providers: a Delphi survey and consensus conference process followed by feasibility testing

Abstract Background Pain in children with rheumatic conditions such as arthritis is common. However, there is currently no standardized method for the assessment of this pain in children presenting to pediatric rheumatologists. A more consistent and comprehensive approach is needed to effectively assess, treat and monitor pain outcomes in the pediatric rheumatology population. The objectives of this study were to: (a) develop consensus regarding a standardized pain assessment tool for use in pediatric rheumatology practice and (b) test the feasibility of three mediums (paper, laptop, and handheld-based applications) for administration. Methods In Phase 1, a 2-stage Delphi technique (pediatric rheumatologists and allied professionals) and consensus meeting (pediatric pain and rheumatology experts) were used to develop the self- and proxy-report pain measures. In Phase 2, 24 children aged 4-7 years (and their parents), and 77 youth, aged 8-18 years, with pain, were recruited during routine rheumatology clinic appointments and completed the pain measure using each medium (order randomly assigned). The participant's rheumatologist received a summary report prior to clinical assessment. Satisfaction surveys were completed by all participants. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the participant characteristics using means and standard deviations (for continuous variables) and frequencies and proportions (for categorical variables) Results Completing the measure using the handheld device took significantly longer for youth (M = 5.90 minutes) and parents (M = 7.00 minutes) compared to paper (M = 3.08 and 2.28 minutes respectively p = 0.001) and computer (M = 3.40 and 4.00 minutes respectively; p < 0.001). There was no difference in the number of missed responses between mediums for children or parents. For youth, the number of missed responses varied across mediums (p = 0.047) with the greatest number of missed responses occurring with the handheld device. Most children preferred the computer (65%, p = 0.008) and youth reported no preference between mediums (p = 0.307). Most physicians (60%) would recommend the computer summary over the paper questionnaire to a colleague. Conclusions It is clinically feasible to implement a newly developed consensus-driven pain measure in pediatric rheumatology clinics using electronic or paper administration. Computer-based administration was most efficient for most users, but the medium employed in practice may depend on child age and economic and administrative factors

Developing a standardized approach to the assessment of pain in children and youth presenting to pediatric rheumatology providers: a Delphi survey and consensus conference process followed by feasibility testing

BACKGROUND: Pain in children with rheumatic conditions such as arthritis is common. However, there is currently no standardized method for the assessment of this pain in children presenting to pediatric rheumatologists. A more consistent and comprehensive approach is needed to effectively assess, treat and monitor pain outcomes in the pediatric rheumatology population. The objectives of this study were to: (a) develop consensus regarding a standardized pain assessment tool for use in pediatric rheumatology practice and (b) test the feasibility of three mediums (paper, laptop, and handheld-based applications) for administration. METHODS: In Phase 1, a 2-stage Delphi technique (pediatric rheumatologists and allied professionals) and consensus meeting (pediatric pain and rheumatology experts) were used to develop the self- and proxy-report pain measures. In Phase 2, 24 children aged 4-7 years (and their parents), and 77 youth, aged 8-18 years, with pain, were recruited during routine rheumatology clinic appointments and completed the pain measure using each medium (order randomly assigned). The participant's rheumatologist received a summary report prior to clinical assessment. Satisfaction surveys were completed by all participants. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the participant characteristics using means and standard deviations (for continuous variables) and frequencies and proportions (for categorical variables) RESULTS: Completing the measure using the handheld device took significantly longer for youth (M = 5.90 minutes) and parents (M = 7.00 minutes) compared to paper (M = 3.08 and 2.28 minutes respectively p = 0.001) and computer (M = 3.40 and 4.00 minutes respectively; p < 0.001). There was no difference in the number of missed responses between mediums for children or parents. For youth, the number of missed responses varied across mediums (p = 0.047) with the greatest number of missed responses occurring with the handheld device. Most children preferred the computer (65%, p = 0.008) and youth reported no preference between mediums (p = 0.307). Most physicians (60%) would recommend the computer summary over the paper questionnaire to a colleague. CONCLUSIONS: It is clinically feasible to implement a newly developed consensus-driven pain measure in pediatric rheumatology clinics using electronic or paper administration. Computer-based administration was most efficient for most users, but the medium employed in practice may depend on child age and economic and administrative factors

Developing a standardized approach to the assessment of pain in children and youth presenting to pediatric rheumatology providers: a Delphi survey and consensus conference process followed by feasibility testing

Abstract Background Pain in children with rheumatic conditions such as arthritis is common. However, there is currently no standardized method for the assessment of this pain in children presenting to pediatric rheumatologists. A more consistent and comprehensive approach is needed to effectively assess, treat and monitor pain outcomes in the pediatric rheumatology population. The objectives of this study were to: (a) develop consensus regarding a standardized pain assessment tool for use in pediatric rheumatology practice and (b) test the feasibility of three mediums (paper, laptop, and handheld-based applications) for administration. Methods In Phase 1, a 2-stage Delphi technique (pediatric rheumatologists and allied professionals) and consensus meeting (pediatric pain and rheumatology experts) were used to develop the self- and proxy-report pain measures. In Phase 2, 24 children aged 4-7 years (and their parents), and 77 youth, aged 8-18 years, with pain, were recruited during routine rheumatology clinic appointments and completed the pain measure using each medium (order randomly assigned). The participant's rheumatologist received a summary report prior to clinical assessment. Satisfaction surveys were completed by all participants. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the participant characteristics using means and standard deviations (for continuous variables) and frequencies and proportions (for categorical variables) Results Completing the measure using the handheld device took significantly longer for youth (M = 5.90 minutes) and parents (M = 7.00 minutes) compared to paper (M = 3.08 and 2.28 minutes respectively p = 0.001) and computer (M = 3.40 and 4.00 minutes respectively; p Conclusions It is clinically feasible to implement a newly developed consensus-driven pain measure in pediatric rheumatology clinics using electronic or paper administration. Computer-based administration was most efficient for most users, but the medium employed in practice may depend on child age and economic and administrative factors.</p

Safety and Effectiveness of Adalimumab in Patients With Polyarticular Course of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: STRIVE Registry Seven-Year Interim Results

Objective To evaluate safety and effectiveness of adalimumab (ADA) in polyarticular-course juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) in the STRIVE registry. Methods STRIVE enrolled patients with polyarticular-course JIA into 2 arms based on treatment with methotrexate (MTX) alone or ADA with/without MTX (ADA +/- MTX). Adverse events (AEs) per 100 patient-years of observation time were analyzed by registry arm. Patients who entered the registry within 4 weeks of starting MTX or ADA +/- MTX, defined as new users, were evaluated for change in disease activity assessed by the 27-joint Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score with the C-reactive protein level (JADAS-27(CRP)). Results At the 7-year cutoff date (June 1, 2016), data from 838 patients were available (MTX arm n = 301, ADA +/- MTX arm n = 537). The most common AEs were nausea (10.3%), sinusitis (4.7%), and vomiting (4.3%) in the MTX arm and arthritis (3.9%), upper respiratory tract infection (3.5%), sinusitis, tonsillitis, and injection site pain (3.0% each) in the ADA +/- MTX arm. Rates of serious infection were 1.5 events/100 patient-years in the MTX arm and 2.0 events/100 patient-years in the ADA +/- MTX arm. AE and serious AE rates were similar in patients receiving ADA with versus without MTX. No deaths or malignancies were reported. New users in the ADA +/- MTX arm showed a trend toward lower mean JADAS-27(CRP)compared with new users in the MTX arm in the first year of STRIVE. Conclusion The STRIVE registry 7-year interim results support the idea that ADA +/- MTX is well tolerated by most children. Registry median ADA exposure was 2.47 (interquartile range 1.0-3.6) years, with 42% of patients continuing ADA at the 7-year cutoff date