48 research outputs found

    A proteinuria cut-off level of 0.7 g /day after 12 months of treatment best predicts long-term renal outcome in lupus nephritis: Data from the MAINTAIN Nephritis Trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Although an early decrease in proteinuria has been correlated with good long-term renal outcome in lupus nephritis (LN), studies aimed at defining a cut-off proteinuria value are missing, except a recent analysis performed on patients randomised in the Euro-Lupus Nephritis Trial, demonstrating that a target value of 0.8 g/day at month 12 optimised sensitivity and specificity for the prediction of good renal outcome. The objective of the current work is to validate this target in another LN study, namely the MAINTAIN Nephritis Trial (MNT). Methods: Long-term (at least 7 years) renal function data were available for 90 patients randomised in the MNT. Receiver operating characteristic curves were built to test the performance of proteinuria measured within the 1st year as short-term predictor of long-term renal outcome. We calculated the positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV). Results: After 12 months of treatment, achievement of a proteinuria <0.7 g/day best predicted good renal outcome, with a sensitivity and a specificity of 71% and 75%, respectively. The PPV was high (94%) but the NPV low (29%). Addition of the requirement of urine red blood cells 645/hpf as response criteria at month 12 reduced sensitivity from 71% to 41%. Conclusions: In this cohort of mainly Caucasian patients suffering from a first episode of LN in most cases, achievement of a proteinuria <0.7 g/day at month 12 best predicts good outcome at 7 years and inclusion of haematuria in the set of criteria at month 12 undermines the sensitivity of early proteinuria decrease for the prediction of good outcome. The robustness of these conclusions stems from the very similar results obtained in two distinct LN cohorts

    A prospective randomised multicentre study comparing continuous and intermittent treatment with celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip

    Full text link
    Objective: To compare the effects of continuous and intermittent celecoxib treatment in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis in flare. Methods: In this 24-week, prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients were randomly assigned to receive continuous (n = 62) or intermittent (n = 61) treatment with celecoxib 200 mg once daily. The primary efficacy end point was the area under the curve (AUC) of the change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) total scores between baseline and week 24 divided by the time interval. Secondary end points included the percentage of days with intake of the flare drug, the AUC of the change in the WOMAC total scores, the mean change from baseline in the WOMAC scores, and the patient's and physician's global assessment of osteoarthritis. Results: There were no significant differences between patients randomised to continuous or intermittent treatment in the primary end point or most of the secondary end points, although a consistent trend supporting continuous treatment was observed. The percentage of days with intake of the flare drug was significantly lower (p = 0.031) in the group receiving continuous versus intermittent celecoxib. Both treatment regimens were well tolerated. Conclusion: The results of this pilot study indicate a potential clinical difference between continuous and intermittent treatment with celecoxib, and may be useful in designing future trials. A larger trial on both efficacy and safety outcomes is required for conclusive evidence in favour of either continuous or intermittent treatment

    A naturalistic study of the determinants of health related quality of life improvement in osteoarthritic patients treated with non-specific non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

    No full text
    Objectives: To capture changes in the quality of life (QoL) occurring in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) during treatment with non-specific non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and to identify factors that predict such changes. Methods: A naturalistic, prospective follow up of 783 patients with OA in whom primary care physicians decided to start treatment with non-selective NSAIDs. Short Form-36 (SF-36) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OA index (WOMAC) were assessed at baseline and after 3 months. Baseline results were compared with QoL values in 4800 subjects randomly selected from the general population. Multiple regression analysis was performed to identify determinants of QoL at baseline and measures influencing changes in SF-36 or WOMAC during follow up. Results: All QoL dimensions were significantly (p<0.01) decreased in patients with OA compared with controls. Significant improvement (p<0.05) in four dimensions of the SF-36 (vitality, role emotional, role physical, bodily pain) and in all components of the WOMAC was seen between baseline and month 3. Older age, female sex, longer duration of OA, and a higher number of comorbidities were the major determinants of a poor QoL at baseline. Maximal benefit from non-specific NSAIDs was seen in patients with the most severe impairment in QoL and the shortest duration of OA. Conclusion: OA negatively impacts all dimensions of the QoL. Non-specific NSAIDs improve the QoL in patients with OA treated in a "real life setting". The profile of patients receiving maximal benefit from such treatment may be of interest for health providers, enabling them to decide who should preferentially be given cytoprotective treatments or coxibs
    corecore