Baricitinib retention rate: ‘real-life’ data from a mono-centric cohort of patients affected by rheumatoid arthritis

ObjectivesThe aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate baricitinib retention rate in patients affected by rheumatoid arthritis. Secondary aims were to compare the impact on treatment persistence of monotherapy and other variables such as systemic corticosteroid use, line of treatment, disease duration, sex, biomarkers positivity, and Herpes Zoster virus infection.Materials and methodsPatients with Rheumatoid Arthritis undergoing baricitinib were consecutively enrolled. Rheumatoid Arthritis diagnosis was performed with 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria. The cohort’s demographic, clinical and therapeutical data were retrospectively collected. The whole follow-up duration was 104 weeks.ResultsNinety-five patients affected by rheumatoid arthritis and treated with baricitinib were consecutively enrolled. At the end of follow-up, the overall retention rate was 69.3%. No statistically significant difference in retention rate was observed between patients treated with baricitinib in monotherapy or in combination with methotrexate (p = 0.638) while patients undergoing a steroidal treatment showed a significantly reduced treatment retention (p = 0.028). Contrarily, patients treated with baricitinib as a first-line b/tsDMARD showed higher drug retention (p = 0.002) compared to further treatment lines. Steroid employment, steroid dosage and previous treatment with bDMARDs correlated with risk of treatment discontinuation and at univariate analysis (p = 0.028, p < 0.001, and p = 0.002 respectively). Multivariate analysis confirmed significance for higher steroid dosage and previous treatment with bDMARDs (p = 0.002 and p = 0.046). No adverse events such as deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism or tubercular infection/reactivation were reported during the study observation.ConclusionOur data show a good baricitinib retention rate after 12 and 24 months of observation (75.1 and 69.3%, respectively). In our cohort, concomitant treatment with methotrexate did not influence treatment persistence while retention was reduced in patients undergoing a steroidal treatment and/or in multi-failure subjects

A Novel Ultrasonographic Anthropometric-Independent Measurement of Median Nerve Swelling in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: The “Nerve/Tendon Ratio” (NTR)

Background: There is little consensus on ultrasound (US) normative values of cross-sectional area of median nerve (MN-CSA) in carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) because of its dependency on anthropometric parameters. We aim to propose a novel anthropometric-independent US parameter: MN-CSA/flexor radialis carpi CSA (FCR-CSA) ratio (“Nerve Tendon Ratio”, NTR), in the diagnosis of clinically and electrodiagnostic (EDS)-defined CTS. Methods: 74 wrists of 49 patients with clinically defined CTS underwent EDS (scored by the 1–5 Padua Scale of electrophysiological severity, PS) and US of carpal tunnel with measurement of MN-CSA (at the carpal tunnel inlet), FCR-CSA (over scaphoid tubercle) and its ratio (NTR, expressed as a percentage). US normality values and intra-operator agreement were assessed in 33 healthy volunteers. Results: In controls, the mean MN-CSA was 5.81 mm2, NTR 64.2%. In 74 clinical CTS, the mean MN-CSA was 12.1 mm2, NTR 117%. In severe CTS (PS > 3), the mean MN-CSA was 15.9 mm2, NTR 148%. In CTS, both MN-CSA and NTR correlated with sensitive conduction velocity (SCV) (p < 0.001), distal motor latency (DML) (p < 0.001) and PS (p < 0.001), with a slight superiority of NTR vs. MN-CSA when controlled for height, wrist circumference and weight. In CTS filtered for anthropometric extremes, only NTR maintained a correlation with SCV (p = 0.023), DML (p = 0.016) and PS (p = 0.009). Diagnostic cut-offs were obtained with a binomial regression analysis. In those patients with a clinical diagnosis of CTS, the cut-off of MN-CSA (AUROC: 0.983) was 8 mm2 (9 mm2 with highest positive predictive value, PPV), while for NTR (AUROC: 0.987), the cut-off was 83% (100% with highest PPV). In patients with EDS findings of severe CTS (PS > 3), the MN-CSA (AUROC: 0.876) cut-off was 12.3 mm2 (15.3 mm2 with highest PPV), while for NTR (AUROC: 0.858) it was 116.2% (146.0% with highest PPV). Conclusions: NTR can be simply and quickly calculated, and it can be used in anthropometric extremes