Inflammatory Rheumatic Disorders and Bone

Inflammatory joint diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, as well as other rheumatic conditions, such as systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and ankylosing spondylitis, comprise a heterogeneous group of joint disorders that are all associated with extra-articular side effects, including bone loss and fractures. The concept of osteoimmunology is based on growing insights into the links between the immune system and bone. The pathogenesis of osteoporosis in these patients is multifactorial. We have, more or less as an example, described this extensively for patients with SLE. High disease activity (inflammation) and immobility are common factors that substantially increase fracture risk in these patients, on top of the background fracture risk based on, among other factors, age, body mass index, and gender. Although no fracture reduction has been shown in intervention studies in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases, we present treatment options that might be useful for clinicians who are treating these patients

The comparative responsiveness of Hospital Universitario Princesa Index and other composite indices for assessing rheumatoid arthritis activity

Objective To evaluate the responsiveness in terms of correlation of the Hospital Universitario La Princesa Index (HUPI) comparatively to the traditional composite indices used to assess disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to compare the performance of HUPI-based response criteria with that of the EULAR response criteria. Methods Secondary data analysis from the following studies: ACT-RAY (clinical trial), PROAR (early RA cohort) and EMECAR (pre-biologic era long term RA cohort). Responsiveness was evaluated by: 1) comparing change from baseline (Delta) of HUPI with Delta in other scores by calculating correlation coefficients; 2) calculating standardised effect sizes. The accuracy of response by HUPI and by EULAR criteria was analyzed using linear regressions in which the dependent variable was change in global assessment by physician (Delta GDA-Phy). Results Delta HUPI correlation with change in all other indices ranged from 0.387 to 0.791); HUPI's standardized effect size was larger than those from the other indices in each database used. In ACT-RAY, depending on visit, between 65 and 80% of patients were equally classified by HUPI and EULAR response criteria. However, HUPI criteria were slightly more stringent, with higher percentage of patients classified as non-responder, especially at early visits. HUPI response criteria showed a slightly higher accuracy than EULAR response criteria when using Delta GDA-Phy as gold standard. Conclusion HUPI shows good responsiveness in terms of correlation in each studied scenario (clinical trial, early RA cohort, and established RA cohort). Response criteria by HUPI seem more stringent than EULAR''s