9 research outputs found
EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update
Recent insights in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) necessitated updating the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) RA management recommendations. A large international Task Force based decisions on evidence from 3 systematic literature reviews, developing 4 overarching principles and 12 recommendations (vs 3 and 14, respectively, in 2013). The recommendations address conventional synthetic (cs) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); glucocorticoids (GC); biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, clazakizumab, sarilumab and sirukumab and biosimilar (bs) DMARDs) and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs (Janus kinase (Jak) inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib). Monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and the targets of sustained clinical remission (as defined by the American College of Rheumatology-(ACR)-EULAR Boolean or index criteria) or low disease activity are discussed. Cost aspects were taken into consideration. As first strategy, the Task Force recommends MTX (rapid escalation to 25 mg/week) plus short-term GC, aiming at >50% improvement within 3 and target attainment within 6 months. If this fails stratification is recommended. Without unfavourable prognostic markers, switching to—or adding—another csDMARDs (plus short-term GC) is suggested. In the presence of unfavourable prognostic markers (autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions, failure of 2 csDMARDs), any bDMARD (current practice) or Jak-inhibitor should be added to the csDMARD. If this fails, any other bDMARD or tsDMARD is recommended. If a patient is in sustained remission, bDMARDs can be tapered. For each recommendation, levels of evidence and Task Force agreement are provided, both mostly very high. These recommendations intend informing rheumatologists, patients, national rheumatology societies, hospital officials, social security agencies and regulators about EULAR's most recent consensus on the management of RA, aimed at attaining best outcomes with current therapies
Organizational interventions and the creation of gendered knowledge: US universities and NSF ADVANCE
Nuclear techniques for the determination of uranium and thorium and their decay products
Recommended from our members
Optimization of Metformin in the GRADE Cohort: Effect on Glycemia and Body Weight
ObjectiveWe evaluated the effect of optimizing metformin dosing on glycemia and body weight in type 2 diabetes.Research design and methodsThis was a prespecified analysis of 6,823 participants in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE) taking metformin as the sole glucose-lowering drug who completed a 4- to 14-week (mean ± SD 7.9 ± 2.4) run-in in which metformin was adjusted to 2,000 mg/day or a maximally tolerated lower dose. Participants had type 2 diabetes for <10 years and an HbA1c ≥6.8% (51 mmol/mol) while taking ≥500 mg of metformin/day. Participants also received diet and exercise counseling. The primary outcome was the change in HbA1c during run-in.ResultsAdjusted for duration of run-in, the mean ± SD change in HbA1c was -0.65 ± 0.02% (-7.1 ± 0.2 mmol/mol) when the dose was increased by ≥1,000 mg/day, -0.48 ± 0.02% (-5.2 ± 0.2 mmol/mol) when the dose was unchanged, and -0.23 ± 0.07% (-2.5 ± 0.8 mmol/mol) when the dose was decreased (n = 2,169, 3,548, and 192, respectively). Higher HbA1c at entry predicted greater reduction in HbA1c (P < 0.001) in univariate and multivariate analyses. Weight loss adjusted for duration of run-in averaged 0.91 ± 0.05 kg in participants who increased metformin by ≥1,000 mg/day (n = 1,894).ConclusionsOptimizing metformin to 2,000 mg/day or a maximally tolerated lower dose combined with emphasis on medication adherence and lifestyle can improve glycemia in type 2 diabetes and HbA1c values ≥6.8% (51 mmol/mol). These findings may help guide efforts to optimize metformin therapy among persons with type 2 diabetes and suboptimal glycemic control
Recommended from our members
Islet Autoimmunity is Highly Prevalent and Associated With Diminished β-Cell Function in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in the Grade Study.
Islet autoimmunity may contribute to β-cell dysfunction in type 2 diabetes (T2D). Its prevalence and clinical significance have not been rigorously determined. In this ancillary study to the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes-A Comparative Effectiveness (GRADE) Study, we investigated the prevalence of cellular and humoral islet autoimmunity in patients with T2D duration 4·0±3·0 y, HbA1c 7·5±0·5% on metformin alone. We measured T cell autoreactivity against islet proteins, islet autoantibodies against GAD65, IA2, ZnT8, and β-cell function. Cellular islet autoimmunity was present in 41·3%, humoral islet autoimmunity in 13·5%, and both in 5·3%. β-cell function calculated as iAUC-CG and ΔC-peptide(0- 30)/Δglucose(0-30) from an oral glucose tolerance test was lower among T cell-positives (T+) than T cell-negatives (T-) using two different adjustments for insulin sensitivity (iAUC-CG: 13·2% [95% CI 0·3, 24·4%] or 11·4% [95% CI 0·4, 21·2%] lower; ΔC-peptide(0-30)/Δglucose(0-30)) 19% [95% CI 3·1, 32·3%] or 17·7% [95% CI 2·6, 30·5%] lower). T+ patients had 17% higher HbA1c (95% CI 0·07, 0·28) and 7·7 mg/dL higher fasting plasma glucose levels (95% CI 0·2,15·3) than T- patients. We conclude that islet autoimmunity is much more prevalent in T2D patients than previously reported. T cell-mediated autoimmunity is associated with diminished β-cell function and worse glycemic control