Reported congenital malformations after exposure to non-tumour necrosis factor inhibitor biologics:A retrospective comparative study in EudraVigilance

AIM: To evaluate the number and nature of reported congenital malformations (CMs) after intrauterine exposure to non-tumour necrosis factor inhibitor biologics (non-TNFi biologics) compared to certolizumab pegol (CZP) MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective comparative study was conducted in the EudraVigilance (EV) database. A safe biologic (CZP) was considered as the reference group. Odds ratios (ORs) for CMs were calculated for each non-TNFi biologics (including abatacept, anakinra, belimumab, ixekizumab, rituximab, secukinumab, tocilizumab, ustekinumab and vedolizumab), versus CZP (quantitative assessment). Then, CM patterns were reviewed in consultation with a clinical geneticist (qualitative assessment). RESULTS: ORs were not statistically significant except for belimumab and vedolizumab (similar in magnitude). Except for vedolizumab, no specific CM patterns were observed for the included non-TNFi biologics. Three cases of corpus callosum agenesis (CCA) were identified for vedolizumab (versus null in CZP and other investigated non-TNFi biologics). Two of the CCA cases were associated with other neurological CMs (one cerebral ventriculomegaly with microcephaly and one polymicrogyria). This may indicate that these CCAs are related to undiagnosed genetic alterations or are associated with the underlying maternal disease, although a definite relationship with vedolizumab exposure cannot be ruled out. CONCLUSION: No special safety signal was identified regarding the occurrence of CMs after exposure to abatacept (n= 64), anakinra (n= 20), belimumab (n= 93), ixekizumab (n= 29), rituximab (n=57), secukinumab (n= 128), tocilizumab (n= 124) and ustekinumab (n= 215). Regarding observed CCAs in the vedolizumab group (n= 113) no firm conclusions can be made based on available information

The IMPACT study:A clustered randomized controlled trial to assess the effect of a referral algorithm for axial spondyloarthritis

Background A substantial number of patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) have axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), but early recognition of these patients is difficult for general practitioners (GPs). The Case Finding Axial Spondyloarthritis (CaFaSpA) referral strategy has shown to be able to identify patients with CLBP at risk for axSpA, but its impact on clinical daily practice is yet unknown. Objective To assess the effect of the CaFaSpA referral strategy on pain caused by disability in primary care patients with CLBP. Methods Within this clustered randomized controlled trial 93 general practices were randomized to either the CaFaSpA referral model (intervention) or usual primary care (control). In each group primary care patients between 18 and 45 years with CLBP were included. The primary outcome was disability caused by CLBP, measured with the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) at baseline and four months. Secondary outcome was the frequency of new axSpA diagnosis. Descriptive analyses were performed, and a linear mixed-effects model was used. Results In total 679 CLBP patients were included of which 333 patients were allocated to the intervention group and 346 to the control group. Sixty-four percent were female and mean age was 36.2 years. The mean RMDQ score at baseline was 8.39 in the intervention group and 8.61 in the control group. At four months mean RMDQ score was 7.65 in the intervention group and 8.15 in the control group. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.50). Six (8%) out of the 75 finally referred patients, were diagnosed with axSpA by their rheumatologist. Conclusions The CaFaSpA referral strategy for axSpA did not have an effect on disability after four months caused by CLBP. However, the strategy is able to detect the axSpA patient within the large CLBP population sufficiently

Paternal inflammatory arthritis is associated with a higher risk of miscarriage:results of a large multicentre study (iFAME-Fertility)

OBJECTIVES: Paternal preconception health is recognized as an important contributor to pregnancy outcomes. Nonetheless, pregnancy outcomes of partners of men with inflammatory arthritis (IA) have never been studied. Our objective was to describe the pregnancy outcomes of partners of men diagnosed with IA.METHODS: We performed a multicentre cross-sectional retrospective study conducted in the Netherlands. Men with IA who were over 40 years old that reported at least one positive pregnancy test were included. To analyse the impact of IA on pregnancy outcomes, pregnancies were classified into two groups: pregnancies conceived after the diagnosis of IA and before the diagnosis of IA.RESULTS: In total, 408 male participants diagnosed with IA reported 897 singleton pregnancies that resulted in 794 live births. Pregnancies conceived after the diagnosis of IA had higher rate of miscarriage (12.27 vs 7.53%, P = &lt;0.05). This increased risk was still present after adjusting for confounders [OR 2.03 (95% CI 1.12, 3.69) P = 0.015].CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study to describe the pregnancy outcomes of partners of men diagnosed with IA and the first to demonstrate that paternal IA is associated with a higher risk of miscarriage. Notwithstanding, the overall rate of miscarriage reported in our study could be comparable to previously reported population estimates.</p

Fab glycosylation of immunoglobulin G does not associate with improvement of rheumatoid arthritis during pregnancy

Background: Changes in immunoglobulin G (IgG) constant domain (Fc) glycosylation are associated with changes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity in response to pregnancy. Here, we sought to determine whether the same holds true for variable domain (Fab) glycosylation. Methods: IgGs were captured from RA and control sera obtained before (RA only), during and after pregnancy, followed by Fc and Fab separation, glycan release, and mass spectrometric detection. In parallel,

EULAR recommendations for terminology and research in individuals at risk of rheumatoid arthritis: report from the Study Group for Risk Factors for Rheumatoid Arthritis

The Study Group for Risk Factors for Rheumatoid Arthritis was established by the EULAR Standing Committee on Investigative Rheumatology to facilitate research into the preclinical and earliest clinically apparent phases of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This report describes the recommendation for terminology to be used to define specific subgroups during different phases of disease, and defines the priorities for research in this area. Terminology was discussed by way of a three-stage structured process: A provisional list of descriptors for each of the possible phases preceding the diagnosis of RA were circulated to members of the study group for review and feedback. Anonymised comments from the members on this list were fed back to participants before a 2-day meeting. 18 participants met to discuss these data, agree terminologies and prioritise important research questions. The study group recommended that, in prospective studies, individuals without RA are described as having: genetic risk factors for RA; environmental risk factors for RA; systemic autoimmunity associated with RA; symptoms without clinical arthritis; unclassified arthritis; which may be used in a combinatorial manner. It was recommended that the prefix ‘pre-RA with:’ could be used before any/any combination of the five points above but only to describe retrospectively a phase that an individual had progressed through once it was known that they have developed RA. An approach to dating disease onset was recommended. In addition, important areas for research were proposed, including research of other tissues in which an adaptive immune response may be initiated, and the identification of additional risk factors and biomarkers for the development of RA, its progression and the development of extra-articular features. These recommendations provide guidance on approaches to describe phases before the development of RA that will facilitate communication between researchers and comparisons between studies. A number of research questions have been defined, requiring new cohorts to be established and new techniques to be developed to image and collect material from different sites

2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: An American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative

Objective The 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR; formerly, the American Rheumatism Association) classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been criticized for their lack of sensitivity in early disease. This work was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for RA. Methods A joint working group from the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism developed, in 3 phases, a new approach to classifying RA. The work focused on identifying, among patients newly presenting with undifferentiated inflammatory synovitis, factors that best discriminated between those who were and those who were not at high risk for persistent and/or erosive disease—this being the appropriate current paradigm underlying the disease construct “rheumatoid arthritis.” Results In the new criteria set, classification as “definite RA” is based on the confirmed presence of synovitis in at least 1 joint, absence of an alternative diagnosis that better explains the synovitis, and achievement of a total score of 6 or greater (of a possible 10) from the individual scores in 4 domains: number and site of involved joints (score range 0–5), serologic abnormality (score range 0–3), elevated acute-phase response (score range 0–1), and symptom duration (2 levels; range 0–1). Conclusion This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features. This will refocus attention on the important need for earlier diagnosis and institution of effective disease-suppressing therapy to prevent or minimize the occurrence of the undesirable sequelae that currently comprise the paradigm underlying the disease construct “rheumatoid arthritis.”Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78045/1/27584_ftp.pd

The 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: Phase 2 methodological report

Objective The American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism have developed new classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The aim of Phase 2 of the development process was to achieve expert consensus on the clinical and laboratory variables that should contribute to the final criteria set. Methods Twenty-four expert RA clinicians (12 from Europe and 12 from North America) participated in Phase 2. A consensus-based decision analysis approach was used to identify factors (and their relative weights) that influence the probability of “developing RA,” complemented by data from the Phase 1 study. Patient case scenarios were used to identify and reach consensus on factors important in determining the probability of RA development. Decision analytic software was used to derive the relative weights for each of the factors and their categories, using choice-based conjoint analysis. Results The expert panel agreed that the new classification criteria should be applied to individuals with undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis in whom at least 1 joint is deemed by an expert assessor to be swollen, indicating definite synovitis. In this clinical setting, they identified 4 additional criteria as being important: number of joints involved and site of involvement, serologic abnormality, acute-phase response, and duration of symptoms in the involved joints. These criteria were consistent with those identified in the Phase 1 data-driven approach. Conclusion The consensus-based, decision analysis approach used in Phase 2 complemented the Phase 1 efforts. The 4 criteria and their relative weights form the basis of the final criteria set.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78048/1/27580_ftp.pd