Effect of nocturnal ventilation on the occurrence of Botrytis cinerea in Mediterranean unheated tomato greenhouses

Botrytis cinerea is the causal agent of grey mould disease which is one of the most important diseases affecting tomato crops in unheated greenhouses. Nocturnal ventilation is a technique that can be used to reduce relative humidity inside unheated greenhouses. The main objectives of this research were to investigate the effect of ventilation management on the environmental conditions and on the disease severity, to develop and validate a model which could predict disease severity and to present a warning system. Experiments were conducted in two plastic greenhouses. Two natural ventilation treatments were randomly assigned to the greenhouses. One was nocturnal ventilation (NV), with the vents open during the day and night, while the other was classical ventilation (CV), in which the vents were open during the day and closed during the night. A tomato crop was grown directly in the soil between the end of February and the end of July during two crop seasons. Climatic data were measured with three meteorological stations, averaged and recorded on an hourly basis. The number of diseased leaflets were counted and removed from the greenhouse. In the NV greenhouse a significant reduction of air humidity and disease appearance was observed. A warning system was developed and can be a useful tool for helping to decide on appropriate actions and the correct timing to avoid conditions that favour disease development. For a more practical application, disease risk levels were defined as a function of the duration of periods with RH > 90%

Patient-reported outcomes for tofacitinib with and without methotrexate, or adalimumab with methotrexate, in rheumatoid arthritis: A phase IIIB/IV trial

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. Objective To provide the first direct comparison of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following treatment with tofacitinib monotherapy versus tofacitinib or adalimumab (ADA) in combination with methotrexate (MTX) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with inadequate response to MTX (MTX-IR). Methods ORAL Strategy (NCT02187055), a phase IIIB/IV, head-to-head, randomised controlled trial, assessed non-inferiority between tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day monotherapy, tofacitinib 5 mg two times per day+MTX and ADA 40 mg every other week+MTX. PROs assessed included the following: Patient Global Assessment of disease activity (PtGA), Pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) summary and domain scores. Results Substantial improvements from baseline were reported across all PROs in all treatment arms, which, in the majority, met or exceeded minimum clinically important differences. Compared with tofacitinib monotherapy, tofacitinib+MTX combination treatment conferred significantly greater improvements in PtGA, Pain and SF-36 physical component summary scores at month 6. Statistically or numerically greater improvements were often, but not uniformly, reported for combination treatments compared with tofacitinib monotherapy at other time points. Conclusion Treatment with tofacitinib+MTX, ADA+MTX and tofacitinib monotherapy resulted in clinically meaningful improvements in PROs in MTX-IR patients with RA. These were comparatively greater with combination treatments versus tofacitinib monotherapy, although differences between treatment arms were small, limiting our ability to confer clinical meaning. Trial registration number NCT02187055

Metabolic and crystal arthropathies: 112. Rapid Improvement in Health-Related Quality of Life in Gouty Arthritis Patients Treated with Canakinumab (ACZ885) Compared to Triamcinolone Acetonide

Background: Canakinumab, a fully human anti-IL-1β antibody has been shown to control inflammation in gouty arthritis. This study evaluated changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients treated with canakinumab or triamcinolone acetonide (TA). Methods: An 8-wk, dose-ranging, active controlled, single-blind study in patients (≥18 to ≤80 years) with acute gouty arthritis flare, refractory to or contraindicated to NSAlDs and/or colchicine, were randomized to canakinumab 10, 25, 50, 90, 150 mg sc or TA 40 mg im. HRQoL was assessed using patient reported outcomes evaluating PCS and MCS, and subscale scores of SF-36® [acute version 2]) and functional disability (HAQ-DI©). Results: In canakinumab 150 mg group, the most severe impairment at baseline was reported for physical functioning and bodily pain; levels of 41.5 and 36.0, respectively, which improved in 7 days to 80.0 and 72.2 (mean increases of 39.0 and 35.6) and at 8 wks improved to 86.1 and 86.6 (mean increases of 44.6 and 50.6); these were higher than levels seen in the general US population. TA group, showed less improvement in 7 days (mean increases of 23.3 and 21.3 for physical function and bodily pain). Functional disability scores, measured by the HAQ-DI© decreased in both treatment groups (Table 1). Conclusions: Gouty arthritis patients treated with canakinumab showed a rapid improvement in physical and mental well-being based on SF-36® scores. In contrast to the TA group, patients treated with canakinumab showed improvement in 7 days in physical function and bodily pain approaching levels of the general population. Disclosure statement: U.A., A.F., V.M., D.R., P.S. and K.S. are employees and shareholders of Novartis Pharma AG. A.P. has received research support from Novartis Pharma AG. N.S. has received research support and consultancy fees from Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, has served on advisory boards for Novartis, Takeda, Savient, URL Pharma and EnzymeRx, and is/has been a member of a speakers' bureau for Takeda. A.S. has received consultation fees from Novartis Pharma AG, Abbott, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Essex, Pfizer, MSD, Roche, UCB and Wyeth. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interes

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

Consensus statement on blocking interleukin-6 receptor and interleukin-6 in inflammatory conditions: an update

Background: Targeting interleukin (IL)-6 has become a major therapeutic strategy in the treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory disease. Interference with the IL-6 pathway can be directed at the specific receptor using anti-IL-6Rα antibodies or by directly inhibiting the IL-6 cytokine. This paper is an update of a previous consensus document, based on most recent evidence and expert opinion, that aims to inform on the medical use of interfering with the IL-6 pathway. Methods: A systematic literature research was performed that focused on IL-6-pathway inhibitors in inflammatory diseases. Evidence was put in context by a large group of international experts and patients in a subsequent consensus process. All were involved in formulating the consensus statements, and in the preparation of this document. Results: The consensus process covered relevant aspects of dosing and populations for different indications of IL-6 pathway inhibitors that are approved across the world, including rheumatoid arthritis, polyarticular-course and systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis, giant cell arteritis, Takayasu arteritis, adult-onset Still’s disease, Castleman’s disease, chimeric antigen receptor-T-cell-induced cytokine release syndrome, neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder and severe COVID-19. Also addressed were other clinical aspects of the use of IL-6 pathway inhibitors, including pretreatment screening, safety, contraindications and monitoring. Conclusions: The document provides a comprehensive consensus on the use of IL-6 inhibition to treat inflammatory disorders to inform healthcare professionals (including researchers), patients, administrators and payers

Impact of Tofacitinib on Components of the ACR Response Criteria: Post Hoc Analysis of Phase III and Phase IIIb/IV Trials

Objective. To evaluate the effect of tofacitinib (TOF) on American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria components in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods. This post hoc analysis pooled data from RA phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing TOF 5 or 10 mg BID, adalimumab (ADA), or placebo, with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, and a phase IIIb/IV RCT assessing TOF 5 mg BID monotherapy, TOF 5 mg BID with methotrexate (MTX), or ADA with MTX. Outcomes included proportions of patients achieving ACR20/50/70 responses and ≥ 20/50/70% improvement rates in ACR components at week 2 and months 1, 3, and 6; and mean percent improvement in ACR components and Clinical or Simplified Disease Activity Index (CDAI or SDAI) low disease activity or remission rates, at month 3, for ACR20/50/70 responders. Results. Across treatment groups, ≥ 20/50/70% improvement rates were numerically higher for most physician- vs patient-reported measures. In phase III RCTs, at earlier timepoints, ≥ 50/70% improvements in patient global assessment of disease activity, pain, and physician global assessment were similar. Among ACR20 responders receiving TOF, mean percent improvements for tender and swollen joint counts were > 70% at month 3. CDAI/SDAI remission was achieved at month 3 by 27.8-45.0% of ACR70 responders receiving TOF. Conclusion. Among ACR20 responders treated with TOF, physician-reported components particularly exceeded 20% response improvement. At month 3, disease state generally did not corroborate ACR70 response criteria. Divergences between physician- and patient-reported measures highlight the importance of identifying appropriate patient-reported outcome targets to manage RA symptoms in clinical practice

Safety profile of upadacitinib in patients at risk of cardiovascular disease: Integrated post hoc analysis of the SELECT phase III rheumatoid arthritis clinical programme

International audienceObjective Increased risk of serious adverse events (AEs) was reported for tofacitinib relative to tumour necrosis factor inhibitor therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) aged ≥50 years enriched for cardiovascular (CV) risk (ORAL Surveillance). We assessed post hoc the potential risk of upadacitinib in a similar RA population.Methods Pooled safety data from six phase III trials were evaluated post hoc for AEs in patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg once a day (with or without conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs), adalimumab 40 mg every other week with concomitant methotrexate (MTX), or MTX monotherapy in the overall trial population and in a subset of patients with higher CV risk (aged ≥50 years, ≥1 CV risk factor). Higher-risk patients from a head-to-head study of upadacitinib 15 mg versus adalimumab (SELECT-COMPARE) were assessed in parallel. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates for treatment-emergent AEs were summarised based on exposure to upadacitinib or comparators.Results A total of 3209 patients received upadacitinib 15 mg, 579 received adalimumab and 314 received MTX monotherapy; ~54% of the patients were included in the overall and SELECT-COMPARE higher-risk populations. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), malignancy (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC)) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) were more frequent in the higher-risk cohorts versus the overall population but were generally similar across treatment groups. Rates of serious infections in higher-risk populations and herpes zoster (HZ) and NMSC in all populations were higher with upadacitinib 15 mg than comparators. Conclusions An increased risk of MACE, malignancy (excluding NMSC) and VTE was observed in higher-risk populations with RA, yet risk was comparable between upadacitinib-treated and adalimumab-treated patients. Higher rates of NMSC and HZ were observed with upadacitinib versus comparators across all populations, and increased rates of serious infections were detected in upadacitinib-treated patients at higher CV risk