Diagnostic dilemma of paraneoplastic arthritis: Case series

Objectives: Paraneoplastic arthritis (PA) may mimic rheumatic diseases. While presenting the demographic and laboratory features of the patients diagnosed with PA, this study also aims to provide possible appropriate tools to differentiate the PA cases from early rheumatoid arthritis (ERA). Methods: Sixty-five patients with PA (male/female: 43/22) from 15 different rheumatology clinics and 50 consecutive patients with ERA (male/female: 13/37) fulfilling the 2010 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for the diagnosis if the RA from Gaziantep Rheumatology Early Arthritis Trial (GREAT) as controls who were diagnosed at least 12 months before, were enrolled into study. Results: Mean ages of the patients with PA and ERA were 50.2 ± 15.3, and 42.7 ± 12.3, respectively, and the mean ages of the patients with PA were significantly higher than the ERA. Unlike the ERA patients, in our case series PA was predominantly observed among males. Oligoarthritis was significantly higher in solid tumors in contrast to ERA (P = 0.001). Polyarthritis and symmetric arthritis were significantly higher in the ERA group in contrast to all malignancies (P = 0.001). Rheumatoid factor (RF) and anticyclic citrullinated peptide antibody (anti-CCP) positivity were significantly higher in the ERA group (each P = 0.001). Lactic dehydrogenase levels of hematologic malignancies were significantly higher than other groups (each, P = 0.001). Conclusions: ERA patients had more symmetric joint involvement than PA; laboratory markers could be also an alternative where there is high RF and anti-CCP positivity with antibody levels among the ERA patients. Finally, the demographic features can be used as differentiating factors; ERA was seen predominantly among females aged 40-59 years which refers to young adults. © 2014 Asia Pacific League of Associations for Rheumatology and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

Axial psoriatic arthritis: the impact of underdiagnosed disease on outcomes in real life

WOS: 000451729300038PubMed ID: 29948352Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) may affect different joints, including the spine. The prevalence of spinal involvement is variable depending on the definition and a subset of patients have been identified in cohorts that do not have clinical features of axial disease and yet have imaging findings. Still, there is not a consensus on how and when to screen axial disease. In this study, we aimed to investigate factors associated with being underdiagnosed for axial psoriatic arthritis (axPsA) and its impacts on outcomes. Disease features and outcomes of axPsA according to the physician (n=415) were compared with patients with imaging findings only (sacroiliitis fulfilling the modified New York criteria, n=112), using data from a real-life PsA registry. Patients with imaging findings only were more frequently women (83/220 (37.7%) vs 29/122 (23.8%); p=0.008). This group also had higher peripheral disease activity (imaging only vs clinical AxPsA: mean (SD) tender joint count 5.3 (6.1) vs 3.3 (4.7), swollen joint count 1.9 (2.9) vs 1.2 (2.4); p<0.001 for both comparisons) and was less often treated using TNF inhibitors (16.1 vs 38.2%; p<0.001) than patients who were classified as axPsA. Patient-reported outcomes were similar in both groups. PsA patients, especially women with more severe peripheral disease, have a higher risk of being underdiagnosed for axPsA. The severity of peripheral symptoms may be a risk factor to mask the spinal features of PsA

Current antiviral practice and course of Hepatitis B virus infection in inflammatory arthritis: a multicentric observational study (A

WOS: 000365587100005PubMed ID: 27708953Objective: The reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a well-known event in hepatitis B surface antigen (HbsAg)-positive patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy. The objective of this study was to assess the antiviral practice and course of HBV infection in inflammatory arthritis. Material and Methods: Nineteen rheumatology centers participated in this retrospective study. HbsAg-positive patients who were taking disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and who were being tested for HBV viral load at a minimum of two different time points were included. The case report form (CRF) consisted of demographic data, rheumatic diseases, treatment profiles, transaminase levels, viral hepatitis serological markers, and HBV viral load. The reactivation of HBV was defined as the abrupt rise in HBV replication by an increase in serum HBV DNA levels in a patient with a previously inactive HBV infection. Results: In total, the data of 101 (female 50.5%) patients were included (76 patients with inactive HBV carriers and 25 patients with chronic HBV infection). The mean age of patients was 44 +/- 12 years, and the mean follow-up duration was 31 +/- 22 months. Of the 101 patients, 70 (69.3%) received antiviral treatment. HBV reactivation was detected in 13 of 76 (17.1%) patients with inactive HBV carriers. HBV reactivation was observed less frequently, not although significantly, in those patients receiving antiviral prophylaxis compared with those not receiving prophylaxis [5/41 (12.2%) vs. 8/33 (24.2%), p=0.17]. Forty-two patients (31 patients had inactive HBV carriers) were using anti-tumor necrosis factor agents. HBV reactivation was detected in 6 of the 31 (19.3%) patients. Twenty-five patients had chronic hepatitis, and five (20%) of them had not received antiviral prophylaxis. HBV viral loads were persistently elevated in 7 (28%) of 25 patients (three patients under and four patients not under antiviral treatment). Conclusion: HBV reactivation was observed in approximately 17% of patients under immunosuppressive treatments. HBV reactivation was more frequently observed in those who did not receive antiviral prophylaxis

Smoking May Be Related To Sacroiliitis In Enteropathic Arthritis Patients: Treasure Real-Life Preliminary Data

Wo

Uveitis Related Factors In Patients With Spondyloarthritis

Wo

Methodology of a new inflammatory arthritis registry: TReasure

Background/aim: The TReasure registry, created in 2017, is an observational multicenter cohort that includes inflammatory arthritis patients. This article reviews the methodology and objectives of the TReasure registry established to collect data from rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and spondyloarthritis (SpA) patients. Methodology: Fifteen rheumatology centers in Turkey will contribute data to the TReasure database. The actual proprietor of the database is the Hacettepe Rheumatology Association (HRD) and Hacettepe Financial Enterprises. Pharmaceutical companies that operate in Turkey (in alphabetical or er), Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Celltrion Healthcare, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB, support the TReasure registry. TReasure is a web-based database to which users connect through a URL (https://www.trials-network.org/treasure) with their unique identifier and passwords provided for data entry and access. TReasure records demographic and clinical features, comorbidities, radiology and laboratory results, measures of disease activity, and treatment data. Discussion: TReasure will provide us with various types of data, such as a cross-sectional view of the current nationwide status of the patients currently receiving these treatments, and retrospective data as much as allowed by the participating centers' records. Finally, a high-quality prospective dataset will be built over the ensuing years from patients with a new diagnosis of RA or SpA