The impact of a csDMARD in combination with a TNF inhibitor on drug retention and clinical remission in axial spondyloarthritis

OBJECTIVES: Many axial spondylarthritis (axSpA) patients receive a conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD) in combination with a TNF inhibitor (TNFi). However, the value of this co-therapy remains unclear. The objectives were to describe the characteristics of axSpA patients initiating a first TNFi as monotherapy compared with co-therapy with csDMARD, to compare one-year TNFi retention and remission rates, and to explore the impact of peripheral arthritis. METHODS: Data was collected from 13 European registries. One-year outcomes included TNFi retention and hazard ratios (HR) for discontinuation with 95% CIs. Logistic regression was performed with adjusted odds ratios (OR) of achieving remission (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS)-CRP < 1.3 and/or BASDAI < 2) and stratified by treatment. Inter-registry heterogeneity was assessed using random-effect meta-analyses, combined results were presented when heterogeneity was not significant. Peripheral arthritis was defined as ≥1 swollen joint at baseline (=TNFi start). RESULTS: Amongst 24 171 axSpA patients, 32% received csDMARD co-therapy (range across countries: 13.5% to 71.2%). The co-therapy group had more baseline peripheral arthritis and higher CRP than the monotherapy group. One-year TNFi-retention rates (95% CI): 79% (78, 79%) for TNFi monotherapy vs 82% (81, 83%) with co-therapy (P < 0.001). Remission was obtained in 20% on monotherapy and 22% on co-therapy (P < 0.001); adjusted OR of 1.16 (1.07, 1.25). Remission rates at 12 months were similar in patients with/without peripheral arthritis. CONCLUSION: This large European study of axial SpA patients showed similar one-year treatment outcomes for TNFi monotherapy and csDMARD co-therapy, although considerable heterogeneity across countries limited the identification of certain subgroups (e.g. peripheral arthritis) that may benefit from co-therapy

The impact of a csDMARD in combination with a TNF inhibitor on drug retention and clinical remission in axial spondyloarthritis

Objectives: Many axial spondylarthritis (axSpA) patients receive a conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD) in combination with a TNF inhibitor (TNFi). However, the value of this co-therapy remains unclear. The objectives were to describe the characteristics of axSpA patients initiating a first TNFi as monotherapy compared with co-therapy with csDMARD, to compare one-year TNFi retention and remission rates, and to explore the impact of peripheral arthritis. Methods: Data was collected from 13 European registries. One-year outcomes included TNFi retention and hazard ratios (HR) for discontinuation with 95% CIs. Logistic regression was performed with adjusted odds ratios (OR) of achieving remission (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS)-CRP &lt; 1.3 and/or BASDAI &lt; 2) and stratified by treatment. Inter-registry heterogeneity was assessed using random-effect meta-analyses, combined results were presented when heterogeneity was not significant. Peripheral arthritis was defined as ≥1 swollen joint at baseline (=TNFi start). Results: Amongst 24 171 axSpA patients, 32% received csDMARD co-therapy (range across countries: 13.5% to 71.2%). The co-therapy group had more baseline peripheral arthritis and higher CRP than the monotherapy group. One-year TNFi-retention rates (95% CI): 79% (78, 79%) for TNFi monotherapy vs 82% (81, 83%) with co-therapy (P &lt; 0.001). Remission was obtained in 20% on monotherapy and 22% on co-therapy (P &lt; 0.001); adjusted OR of 1.16 (1.07, 1.25). Remission rates at 12 months were similar in patients with/without peripheral arthritis. Conclusion: This large European study of axial SpA patients showed similar one-year treatment outcomes for TNFi monotherapy and csDMARD co-therapy, although considerable heterogeneity across countries limited the identification of certain subgroups (e.g. peripheral arthritis) that may benefit from co-therapy

A queueing analysis of max-min fairness, proportional fairness and balanced fairness

We compare the performance of three usual allocations, namely max-min fairness, proportional fairness and balanced fairness, in a communication network whose resources are shared by a random number of data flows. The model consists of a network of processorsharing queues. The vector of service rates, which is constrained by some compact, convex capacity set representing the network resources, is a function of the number of customers in each queue. This function determines the way network resources are allocated. We show that this model is representative of a rich class of wired and wireless networks. We give in this general framework the stability condition of max-min fairness, proportional fairness and balanced fairness and compare their performance on a number of toy networks

European Collaborative Project on Affective Disorders: interactions between genetic and psychosocial vulnerability factors

Despite strong evidence provided by genetic epidemiology of genetic involvement in the aetiology of bipolar and unipolar affective disorders, the exact nature of the predisposing gene(s) is still being investigated through linkage and association studies. The interaction of susceptibility genes and environmental factors in these diseases is also of fundamental importance and requires proper investigation. Interesting theories have recently been proposed examining the possible role of various chromosomal regions, candidate genes and mutations in affective disorders. Reliable multicentre-based methodology is currently being employed to examine these theories, with attention given to statistical analysis and the statistical power of the sample. The present article describes the European Collaborative Project on Affective Disorders (ECPAD) ‘Interactions between genetic and psychosocial vulnerability factors’, involving 15 European centres. A description is given of the association and family samples collected for the project and also the methodology used to analyse interactions in the gene-psychosocial environment. This material provides a powerful tool in the search for susceptibility genes in affective disorders and takes into account non-genetic aetiological factors. Psychiatr Genet 8:197-205 (C) 1998 Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins