Impact of Smoking in Response to Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors in Axial Spondyloarthritis : Methodologic Considerations for Longitudinal Observational Studies

We are grateful to Professor Gary Macfarlane (Chief Investigator of BSRBR-AS), the staff of the BSRBR-AS (Claudia Zabke, Elizabeth Ferguson-Jones, Maureen Heddle, Nafeesa Nazlee, and Barry Morris), and the recruiting staff at the clinical centers.Peer reviewedPostprin

Comparative Risk of Cardiovascular Outcomes Between Topical and Oral Nonselective NSAIDs in Taiwanese Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Background: Topical NSAIDs have less systemic absorption than oral NSAIDs. We examined the risk of cardiovascular events associated with nonselective topical NSAIDs versus oral NSAIDs among patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Taiwan. Methods and Results: We conducted a retrospective cohort study that included patients with incident rheumatoid arthritis who were newly starting therapy with nonselective topical NSAIDs or oral NSAIDs. We used the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). The first date patients received either type of NSAID was defined as the index date. NSAID exposures continued until there was a treatment gap of >30 days. The main outcome was composite cardiovascular events, including myocardial infarction, unstable angina, heart failure, stroke, or revascularization. Follow‐up was censored at treatment discontinuation, switch or addition of other NSAID category, cardiovascular outcome, death, or the end of the study. Propensity score weighted Cox regression models were used to compare the risk of cardiovascular events between topical NSAIDs and oral NSAIDs. There were 10 758 and 78 056 treatment episodes for topical and oral NSAIDs identified. After weighting by propensity score, the cohorts were well balanced over all covariates. The crude cardiovascular event rate was 1.87 per 100 person‐years for topical NSAIDs and 2.14 per 100 person‐years for oral NSAIDs. Results of propensity score weighted Cox regression found the topical NSAID group had 36% lower risk for cardiovascular events compared with the oral NSAID group (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.43–0.95). Conclusions: We found topical NSAID users experienced a reduced risk of cardiovascular events compared with oral NSAID users. If future studies with a larger sample size and longer follow‐up confirm these results, NSAID prescribing might change accordingly

Delayed Denosumab Injections and Bone Mineral Density Response: An Electronic Health Record-based Study.

CONTEXT: Discontinuation of denosumab leads to a rapid reversal of its therapeutic effect. However, there are no data regarding how unintended delays or missed injections of denosumab impact bone mineral density (BMD) response. OBJECTIVE: We examined the association of delays in injections of denosumab with BMD change. DESIGN:We used electronic medical records from two academic hospitals from 2010 to 2017. PARTICIPANTS: Patients over 45 years of age and used at least two doses of 60mg denosumab. Denosumab adherence was evaluated by the medication coverage ratio (MCR). Good adherence corresponds to a dosing interval ≤7 months (defined by MCR ≥93%), moderate adherence corresponds to an interval of 7-10 months (MCR 75-93%), and poor adherence corresponds to an interval ≥10 months (MCR ≤74%). OUTCOME MEASURES: Annualized percent BMD change from baseline at the lumbar spine, total hip, and femoral neck. RESULTS:We identified 938 denosumab injections among 151 patients; the mean (SD) age was 69 (10) years, and 95% were female. Patients with good adherence had an annualized BMD increase of 3.9% at the lumbar spine, compared with patients with moderate (3.0%) or poor adherence (1.4%, p for trend 0.002). Patients with good adherence had an annualized BMD increase of 2.1% at the total hip, compared with patients with moderate (1.3%) or poor adherence (0.6%, p for trend 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: A longer interval between denosumab injections is associated with suboptimal BMD response at both spine and total hip. Strategies to improve the timely administration of denosumab in real-world settings are needed

Smoking status and cause-specific discontinuation of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in axial spondyloarthritis

Availability of data and materials BSRBR-AS data are held at the University of Aberdeen. Funding The BSRBR-AS is funded by the British Society for Rheumatology (BSR) who have received funding for this from Pfizer, AbbVie and UCB. These companies receive advance copies of manuscripts for comments. They have no input in determining the topics for analysis or work involved in undertaking it. SZ was supported by awards from the Royal College of Physicians (John Glyn bursary) and Royal Society of Medicine (Kovacs fellowship). KY received financial support for his doctoral study from the Pharmacoepidemiology Program at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health (partially supported by training grants from Pfizer, Takeda, Bayer and ASISA) and Honjo International Scholarship Foundation. DHS was supported by grants from the National Institute of Health (NIH-P30-AR072577 (VERITY) and NIH-K24AR055989) and has received funding from Abbvie and Amgen unrelated to this work. Acknowledgements We are grateful to Professor Gary Macfarlane (Chief Investigator of BSRBR-AS) and the staff of the BSRBR-AS register who are currently Claudia Zabke, Elizabeth Ferguson-Jones, Maureen Heddle, Nafeesa Nazlee and Barry Morris, and to the recruiting staff at the clinical centres, details of which are available at: https://www.abdn.ac.uk/iahs/research/epidemiology/spondyloarthritisPeer reviewedPublisher PD

Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with a zero calcium score

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice CT coronary angiography (CT-CA) for the detection of significant coronary artery stenosis in patients with zero on the Agatston Calcium Score (CACS). We enrolled 279 consecutive patients (96 male, mean age 48±12 years) with suspected coronary artery disease. Patients were symptomatic (n=208) or asymptomatic (n=71), and underwent conventional coronary angiography (CAG). For CT-CA we administered an IV bolus of 100 ml of iodinated contrast material. CT-CA was compared to CAG using a threshold for significant stenosis of ≤50%. The prevalence of disease demonstrated at CAG was 15% (1.4% in asymptomatic). The population at CAG showed no or non-significant disease in 85% (238/279), single vessel disease in 9% (25/279), and multi-vessel disease in 6% (16/279). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of CT-CA vs. CAG on the patient level were 100%, 95%, 76%, and 100% in the overall population and 100%, 100%, 100%, and 100% in asymptomatic patients, respectively. CT-CA proves high diagnostic performance in patients with or without symptoms and with zero CACS. The prevalence of significant disease detected by CT-CA was not negligible in asymptomatic patients. The role of CT-CA in asymptomatic patients remains uncertain

2020 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Management of Reproductive Health in Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154675/1/art41191.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154675/2/art41191_am.pd

Left and right ventricle assessment with Cardiac CT: validation study vs. Cardiac MR

Objectives To compare Magnetic Resonance (MR) and Computed Tomography (CT) for the assessment of left (LV) and right (RV) ventricular functional parameters. Methods Seventy nine patients underwent both Cardiac CT and Cardiac MR. Images were acquired using short axis (SAX) reconstructions for CT and 2D cine b-SSFP (balanced- steady state free precession) SAX sequence for MR, and evaluated using dedicated software. Results CT and MR images showed good agreement: LV EF (Ejection Fraction) (52±14% for CT vs. 52±14% for MR; r0 0.73; p>0.05); RV EF (47±12% for CT vs. 47±12% for MR; r00.74; p>0.05); LV EDV (End Diastolic Volume) (74± 21 ml/m 2 for CT vs. 76±25 ml/m 2 for MR; r00.59; p>0.05); RV EDV (84±25 ml/m 2 for CT vs. 80±23 ml/m 2 for MR; r0 0.58; p>0.05); LV ESV (End Systolic Volume)(37±19 ml/m 2 for CT vs. 38±23 ml/m 2 for MR; r00.76; p>0.05); RV ESV (46±21 ml/m 2 for CT vs. 43±18 ml/m 2 for MR; r00.70; p>0.05). Intra- and inter-observer variability were good, and the performance of CT was maintained for different EF subgroups. Conclusions Cardiac CT provides accurate and reproducible LVand RV volume parameters compared with MR, and can be considered as a reliable alternative for patients who are not suitable to undergo MR. Key Points • Cardiac-CT is able to provide Left and Right Ventricular function. • Cardiac-CT is accurate as MR for LV and RV volume assessment. • Cardiac-CT can provide accurate evaluation of coronary arteries and LV and RV function

Antimicrobial resistance among migrants in Europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Rates of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are rising globally and there is concern that increased migration is contributing to the burden of antibiotic resistance in Europe. However, the effect of migration on the burden of AMR in Europe has not yet been comprehensively examined. Therefore, we did a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify and synthesise data for AMR carriage or infection in migrants to Europe to examine differences in patterns of AMR across migrant groups and in different settings. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus with no language restrictions from Jan 1, 2000, to Jan 18, 2017, for primary data from observational studies reporting antibacterial resistance in common bacterial pathogens among migrants to 21 European Union-15 and European Economic Area countries. To be eligible for inclusion, studies had to report data on carriage or infection with laboratory-confirmed antibiotic-resistant organisms in migrant populations. We extracted data from eligible studies and assessed quality using piloted, standardised forms. We did not examine drug resistance in tuberculosis and excluded articles solely reporting on this parameter. We also excluded articles in which migrant status was determined by ethnicity, country of birth of participants' parents, or was not defined, and articles in which data were not disaggregated by migrant status. Outcomes were carriage of or infection with antibiotic-resistant organisms. We used random-effects models to calculate the pooled prevalence of each outcome. The study protocol is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016043681. FINDINGS: We identified 2274 articles, of which 23 observational studies reporting on antibiotic resistance in 2319 migrants were included. The pooled prevalence of any AMR carriage or AMR infection in migrants was 25·4% (95% CI 19·1-31·8; I2 =98%), including meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (7·8%, 4·8-10·7; I2 =92%) and antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (27·2%, 17·6-36·8; I2 =94%). The pooled prevalence of any AMR carriage or infection was higher in refugees and asylum seekers (33·0%, 18·3-47·6; I2 =98%) than in other migrant groups (6·6%, 1·8-11·3; I2 =92%). The pooled prevalence of antibiotic-resistant organisms was slightly higher in high-migrant community settings (33·1%, 11·1-55·1; I2 =96%) than in migrants in hospitals (24·3%, 16·1-32·6; I2 =98%). We did not find evidence of high rates of transmission of AMR from migrant to host populations. INTERPRETATION: Migrants are exposed to conditions favouring the emergence of drug resistance during transit and in host countries in Europe. Increased antibiotic resistance among refugees and asylum seekers and in high-migrant community settings (such as refugee camps and detention facilities) highlights the need for improved living conditions, access to health care, and initiatives to facilitate detection of and appropriate high-quality treatment for antibiotic-resistant infections during transit and in host countries. Protocols for the prevention and control of infection and for antibiotic surveillance need to be integrated in all aspects of health care, which should be accessible for all migrant groups, and should target determinants of AMR before, during, and after migration. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, Imperial College Healthcare Charity, the Wellcome Trust, and UK National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare-associated Infections and Antimictobial Resistance at Imperial College London