Towards UK poSt Arthroplasty Follow-up rEcommendations (UK SAFE): protocol for an evaluation of the requirements for arthroplasty follow-up, and the production of consensus-based recommendations

Introduction: Hip and knee arthroplasties have revolutionised the management of degenerative joint diseases and, due to an ageing population, are becoming increasingly common. Follow-up of joint prostheses is to identify problems in symptomatic or asymptomatic patients due to infection, osteolysis, bone loss or potential peri-prosthetic fracture, enabling timely intervention to prevent catastrophic failure at a later date. Early revision is usually more straight-forward surgically and less traumatic for the patient. However, routine long-term follow-up is costly and requires considerable clinical time. Therefore, some centres in the UK have curtailed this aspect of primary hip and knee arthroplasty services, doing so without an evidence-base that such disinvestment is clinically- or cost-effective. Methods: Given the timeline from joint replacement to revision, conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to determine potential consequences of disinvestment in hip and knee arthroplasty follow-up is not feasible. Furthermore the low revision rates of modern prostheses, less than 10% at 10 years, would necessitate thousands of patients to adequately power such a study. The huge variation in follow-up practice across the UK also limits the generalisability of an RCT. This study will therefore use a mixed-methods approach to examine the requirements for arthroplasty follow-up and produce evidence- and consensus-based recommendations as to how, when and on whom follow-up should be conducted. Four interconnected work packages will be completed: 1) a systematic literature review; 2a) analysis of routinely-collected NHS data from five national datasets to understand when and which patients present for revision surgery; 2b) prospective data regarding how patients currently present for revision surgery; 3) economic modelling to simulate long-term costs and quality-adjusted life years associated with different follow-up care models; 4) a Delphi-consensus process, involving all stakeholders, to develop a policy document which includes a stratification algorithm to determine appropriate follow-up care for an individual patient

Harmonising data collection from osteoarthritis studies to enable stratification: recommendations on core data collection from an Arthritis Research UK clinical studies group

Objective. Treatment of OA by stratifying for commonly used and novel therapies will likely improve the range of effective therapy options and their rational deployment in this undertreated, chronic disease. In order to develop appropriate datasets for conducting post hoc analyses to inform approaches to stratification for OA, our aim was to develop recommendations on the minimum data that should be recorded at baseline in all future OA interventional and observational studies. Methods. An Arthritis Research UK study group comprised of 32 experts used a Delphi-style approach supported by a literature review of systematic reviews to come to a consensus on core data collection for OA studies. Results. Thirty-five systematic reviews were used as the basis for the consensus group discussion. For studies with a primary structural endpoint, core domains for collection were defined as BMI, age, gender, racial origin, comorbidities, baseline OA pain, pain in other joints and occupation. In addition to the items generalizable to all anatomical sites, joint-specific domains included radiographic measures, surgical history and anatomical factors, including alignment. To demonstrate clinical relevance for symptom studies, the collection of mental health score, self-efficacy and depression scales were advised in addition to the above. Conclusions. Currently it is not possible to stratify patients with OA into therapeutic groups. A list of core and optional data to be collected in all OA interventional and observational studies was developed, providing a basis for future analyses to identify predictors of progression or response to treatment

Harmonising data collection from osteoarthritis studies to enable stratification: recommendations on core data collection from an Arthritis Research UK clinical studies group

Objective. Treatment of OA by stratifying for commonly used and novel therapies will likely improve the range of effective therapy options and their rational deployment in this undertreated, chronic disease. In order to develop appropriate datasets for conducting post hoc analyses to inform approaches to stratification for OA, our aim was to develop recommendations on the minimum data that should be recorded at baseline in all future OA interventional and observational studies.Methods. An Arthritis Research UK study group comprised of 32 experts used a Delphi-style approach supported by a literature review of systematic reviews to come to a consensus on core data collection for OA studies.Results. Thirty-five systematic reviews were used as the basis for the consensus group discussion. For studies with a primary structural endpoint, core domains for collection were defined as BMI, age, gender, racial origin, comorbidities, baseline OA pain, pain in other joints and occupation. In addition to the items generalizable to all anatomical sites, joint-specific domains included radiographic measures, surgical history and anatomical factors, including alignment. To demonstrate clinical relevance for symptom studies, the collection of mental health score, self-efficacy and depression scales were advised in addition to the above.Conclusions. Currently it is not possible to stratify patients with OA into therapeutic groups. A list of core and optional data to be collected in all OA interventional and observational studies was developed, providing a basis for future analyses to identify predictors of progression or response to treatment

The history of falls and the association of the timed up and go test to falls and near-falls in older adults with hip osteoarthritis

Abstract Background Falling accounts for a significant number of hospital and long-term care admissions in older adults. Many adults with the combination of advancing age and functional decline associated with lower extremity osteoarthritis (OA), are at an even greater risk. The purpose of this study was to describe fall and near-fall history, location, circumstances and injuries from falls in a community-dwelling population of adults over aged 65 with hip OA and to determine the ability of the timed up and go test (TUG) to classify fallers and near-fallers. Method A retrospective observational study of 106 older men and women with hip pain for six months or longer, meeting a clinical criteria for the presence of hip OA at one or both hips. An interview for fall and near-fall history and administration of the TUG were administered on one occasion. Results Forty-five percent of the sample had at least one fall in the past year, seventy-seven percent reported occasional or frequent near-falls. The majority of falls occurred during ambulation and ascending or descending steps. Forty percent experienced an injury from the fall. The TUG was not associated with history of falls, but was associated with near-falls. Higher TUG scores occurred for those who were older, less mobile, and with greater number of co-morbidities. Conclusion A high percentage of older adults with hip OA experience falls and near-falls which may be attributed to gait impairments related to hip OA. The TUG could be a useful screening instrument to predict those who have frequent near-falls, and thus might be useful in predicting risk of future falls in this population.</p

Hydroxychloroquine effectiveness in reducing symptoms of hand osteoarthritis (HERO): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common type of arthritis, causing significant joint pain and disability. It is already a major cause of healthcare expenditure and its incidence will further increase with the ageing population. Current treatments for OA have major limitations and new analgesic treatments are needed. Synovitis is prevalent in OA and is associated with pain. Hydroxychloroquine is used in routine practice for treating synovitis in inflammatory arthritides, such as rheumatoid arthritis. We propose that treating patients with symptomatic hand OA with hydroxychloroquine will be a practical and safe treatment to reduce synovitis and pain. Methods/design HERO is an investigator-initiated, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. A total of 252 subjects with symptomatic hand OA will be recruited across primary and secondary care sites in the UK and randomized on a 1:1 basis to active treatment or placebo for 12 months. Daily medication dose will range from 200 to 400 mg according to ideal body weight. The primary endpoint is change in average hand pain during the previous two weeks (measured on a numerical rating scale (NRS)) between baseline and six months. Secondary endpoints include other self-reported pain, function and quality-of-life measures and radiographic structural change at 12 months. A health economics analysis will also be performed. An ultrasound substudy will be conducted to examine baseline levels of synovitis. Linear and logistic regression will be used to compare changes between groups using univariable and multivariable modelling analyses. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. Discussion The HERO trial is designed to examine whether hydroxychloroquine is an effective analgesic treatment for OA and whether it provides any long-term structural benefit. The ultrasound substudy will address whether baseline synovitis is a predictor of therapeutic response. This will potentially provide a new treatment for OA, which could be of particular use in the primary care setting. Trial registration ISRCTN91859104

Hydroxychloroquine effectiveness in reducing symptoms of hand osteoarthritis (HERO): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common type of arthritis, causing significant joint pain and disability. It is already a major cause of healthcare expenditure and its incidence will further increase with the ageing population. Current treatments for OA have major limitations and new analgesic treatments are needed. Synovitis is prevalent in OA and is associated with pain. Hydroxychloroquine is used in routine practice for treating synovitis in inflammatory arthritides, such as rheumatoid arthritis. We propose that treating patients with symptomatic hand OA with hydroxychloroquine will be a practical and safe treatment to reduce synovitis and pain. Methods/design: HERO is an investigator-initiated, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. A total of 252 subjects with symptomatic hand OA will be recruited across primary and secondary care sites in the UK and randomized on a 1:1 basis to active treatment or placebo for 12 months. Daily medication dose will range from 200 to 400 mg according to ideal body weight. The primary endpoint is change in average hand pain during the previous two weeks (measured on a numerical rating scale (NRS)) between baseline and six months. Secondary endpoints include other self-reported pain, function and quality-of-life measures and radiographic structural change at 12 months. A health economics analysis will also be performed. An ultrasound substudy will be conducted to examine baseline levels of synovitis. Linear and logistic regression will be used to compare changes between groups using univariable and multivariable modelling analyses. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. Discussion: The HERO trial is designed to examine whether hydroxychloroquine is an effective analgesic treatment for OA and whether it provides any long-term structural benefit. The ultrasound substudy will address whether baseline synovitis is a predictor of therapeutic response. This will potentially provide a new treatment for OA, which could be of particular use in the primary care setting

Quantitative Trait Loci for Bone Lengths on Chromosome 5 Using Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry Imaging in the Twins UK Cohort

Human height is a highly heritable and complex trait but finding important genes has proven more difficult than expected. One reason might be the composite measure of height which may add heterogeneity and noise. The aim of this study was to conduct a genome-wide linkage scan to identify quantitative trait loci (QTL) for lengths of spine, femur, tibia, humerus and radius. These were investigated as alternative measures for height in a large, population–based twin sample with the potential to find genes underlying bone size and bone diseases. 3,782 normal Caucasian females, 18–80 years old, with whole body dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) images were used. A novel and reproducible method, linear pixel count (LPC) was used to measure skeletal sizes on DXA images. Intraclass correlations and heritability estimates were calculated for lengths of spine, femur, tibia, humerus and radius on monozygotic (MZ; n = 1,157) and dizygotic (DZ; n = 2,594) twins. A genome-wide linkage scan was performed on 2000 DZ twin subjects. All skeletal sites excluding spine were highly correlated. Intraclass correlations showed results for MZ twins to be significantly higher than DZ twins for all traits. Heritability results were as follows: spine, 66%; femur, 73%; tibia, 65%; humerus, 57%; radius, 68%. Results showed reliable evidence of highly suggestive linkage on chromosome 5 for spine (LOD score  =  3.0) and suggestive linkage for femur (LOD score  =  2.19) in the regions of 105cM and 155cM respectively. We have shown strong heritability of all skeletal sizes measured in this study and provide preliminary evidence that spine length is linked to the chromosomal region 5q15-5q23.1. Bone size phenotype appears to be more useful than traditional height measures to uncover novel genes. Replication and further fine mapping of this region is ongoing to determine potential genes influencing bone size and diseases affecting bone

Maternal gestational vitamin D supplementation and offspring bone health (MAVIDOS): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Maternal vitamin D status has been associated with bone mass of offspring in many, but not all, observational studies. However, maternal vitamin D repletion during pregnancy has not yet been proven to improve offspring bone mass in a randomised controlled trial. We aimed to assess whether neonates born to mothers supplemented with vitamin D during pregnancy have greater whole-body bone mineral content (BMC) at birth than those of mothers who had not received supplementation. METHODS: The Maternal Vitamin D Osteoporosis Study (MAVIDOS) was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial that recruited pregnant women from three study sites in the UK (Southampton, Oxford, and Sheffield). Eligible participants were older than 18 years, with a singleton pregnancy, gestation of less than 17 weeks, and a serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) concentration of 25-100 nmol/L at 10-17 weeks' gestation. P'articipants were randomly assigned (1:1), in randomly permuted blocks of ten, to either cholecalciferol 1000 IU/day or matched placebo, taken orally, from 14 weeks' gestation (or as soon as possible before 17 weeks' gestation if recruited later) until delivery. Participants and the research team were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was neonatal whole-body BMC, assessed within 2 weeks of birth by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), analysed in all randomly assigned neonates who had a usable DXA scan. Safety outcomes were assessed in all randomly assigned participants. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry, ISRCTN 82927713, and the European Clinical Trials Database, EudraCT 2007-001716-23. FINDINGS: Between Oct 10, 2008, and Feb 11, 2014, we randomly assigned 569 pregnant women to placebo and 565 to cholecalciferol 1000 IU/day. 370 (65%) neonates in the placebo group and 367 (65%) neonates in the cholecalciferol group had a usable DXA scan and were analysed for the primary endpoint. Neonatal whole-body BMC of infants born to mothers assigned to cholecalciferol 1000 IU/day did not significantly differ from that of infants born to mothers assigned to placebo (61·6 g [95% CI 60·3-62·8] vs 60·5 g [59·3-61·7], respectively; p=0·21). We noted no significant differences in safety outcomes, apart from a greater proportion of women in the placebo group with severe post-partum haemorrhage than those in the cholecalciferol group (96 [17%] of 569 mothers in the placebo group vs 65 [12%] of 565 mothers in the cholecalciferol group; p=0·01). No adverse events were deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: Supplementation of women with cholecalciferol 1000 IU/day during pregnancy did not lead to increased offspring whole-body BMC compared with placebo, but did show that 1000 IU of cholecalciferol daily is sufficient to ensure that most pregnant women are vitamin D replete, and it is safe. These findings support current approaches to vitamin D supplementation in pregnancy. Results of the ongoing MAVIDOS childhood follow-up study are awaited. FUNDING: Arthritis Research UK, Medical Research Council, Bupa Foundation, and National Institute for Health Research

Pain reduction with oral methotrexate in knee osteoarthritis, a pragmatic phase iii trial of treatment effectiveness (PROMOTE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background Osteoarthritis (OA) is the fastest growing cause of disability worldwide. Current treatments for OA are severely limited and a large proportion of people with OA live in constant, debilitating pain. There is therefore an urgent need for novel treatments to reduce pain. Synovitis is highly prevalent in OA and is associated with pain. In inflammatory arthritides such as rheumatoid arthritis, methotrexate (MTX) is the gold standard treatment for synovitis and has a well-known, acceptable toxicity profile. We propose that using MTX to treat patients with symptomatic knee OA will be a practical and safe treatment to reduce synovitis and, consequently, pain. Methods/Design Pain Reduction with Oral Methotrexate in knee Osteoarthritis, a pragmatic phase III trial of Treatment Effectiveness (PROMOTE) is an investigator-initiated, multi-centre, randomized, double-blind, pragmatic placebo-controlled trial. A total of 160 participants with symptomatic knee OA will be recruited across primary and secondary care sites in the United Kingdom and randomized on a 1:1 basis to active treatment or placebo, in addition to usual care, for 12 months. As is usual practice for MTX, dosing will be escalated over six weeks to 25 mg (or maximum tolerated dose) weekly for the remainder of the study. The primary endpoint is change in average knee pain during the past week (measured on an 11-point numerical rating scale) between baseline and six months. Secondary endpoints include other self-reported pain, function and quality-of-life measures. A health economics analysis will also be performed. A magnetic resonance imaging substudy will be conducted to provide an explanatory mechanism for associated symptom change by examining whether MTX reduces synovitis and whether this is related to symptom change. Linear and logistic regression will be used to compare changes between groups using univariable and multivariable modelling analyses. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. Discussion The PROMOTE trial is designed to examine whether MTX is an effective analgesic treatment for OA. The MRI substudy will address the relationship between synovitis and symptom change. This will potentially provide a much needed new treatment for knee OA. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials identifier: ISRCTN77854383 (registered: 25 October 2013)

Reduction in Fracture Rate and Back Pain and Increased Quality of Life in Postmenopausal Women Treated with Teriparatide: 18-Month Data from the European Forsteo Observational Study (EFOS)

The European Forsteo Observational Study was designed to examine the effectiveness of teriparatide in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis treated for up to 18 months in normal clinical practice in eight European countries. The incidence of clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fragility fractures, back pain, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL, EQ-5D) were assessed. Spontaneous reports of adverse events were collected. All 1,648 enrolled women were teriparatide treatment-naive, 91.0% of them had previously received other anti-osteoporosis drugs, and 72.8% completed the 18-month study. A total of 168 incident clinical fractures were sustained by 138 (8.8%) women (821 fractures/10,000 patient-years). A 47% decrease in the odds of fracture in the last 6-month period compared to the first 6-month period was observed (P < 0.005). Mean back pain VAS was reduced by 25.8 mm at end point (P < 0.001). Mean change from baseline in EQ-VAS was 13 mm by 18 months. The largest improvements were reported in the EQ-5D subdomains of usual activities and pain/discomfort. There were 365 adverse events spontaneously reported, of which 48.0% were considered related to teriparatide; adverse events were the reason for discontinuation for 79 (5.8%) patients. In conclusion, postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis who were prescribed teriparatide in standard clinical practice had a significant reduction in the incidence of fragility fractures and a reduction in back pain over an 18-month treatment period. This was associated with a clinically significant improvement in HRQoL. Safety was consistent with current prescribing information. These results should be interpreted in the context of the open-label, noncontrolled design of the study