A Need to Meet Patient Expectations

Funding Information: Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Palermo within the Nicola Veronese reports personal fees from IBSA, Mylan, and Fidia outside of the submitted work. Cyrus Cooper reports personal fees from Alliance for Better Bone Health, Amgen, Eli Lilly, GSK, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Servier, Takeda, and UCB outside of the submitted work. Jean-Yves Reginster reports CRUI-CARE Agreement. Funding Information:grants from IBSA-Genevrier, Mylan, CNIEL, and Radius Health (through his institution); consulting fees from IBSA-Genevrier, Mylan, CNIEL, Radius Health, and Pierre Fabre; fees for participation in review activities from IBSA-Genevrier, Mylan, CNIEL, Radius Health, and Teva; and payment for lectures from Ag-Novos, CERIN, CNIEL, Dairy Research Council (DRC), Echolight, IBSA-Genevrier, Mylan, Pfizer Consumer Health, Teva, and Theramex outside of the submitted work. Olivier Bruyère reports grants or lecture fees from Amgen, Aptissen, Biophytis, IBSA, MEDA, Mylan, Novartis, Sanofi, Servier, SMB, TRB Chemedica, UCB, and Viatris outside of the submitted work. Ali Mobasheri declares personal fees from Abbott, Abbvie, Achē Laboratórios Farmacêuticos, Galapagos, GSK Consumer Healthcare, Kolon TissueGene, Laboratoires Expansciences, Merck, Pacira Biosciences, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Servier. François Rannou reports grants or lecture fees from Pierre Fabre, Mylan, MSD, Thuasne, IBSA, Pfizer, Genévrier, Expanscience, Scarcell, Skindermic, and Peptinov. Ida K. Haugen reports grants from Pfizer and is a consultant for Novartis outside of the submitted work. Elaine M. Dennison declares grants/fees from Pfizer, Lilly, UCB, and Viatris. Philip G. Conaghan is supported in part by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Leeds Biomedical Research Centre (the views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health), and reports consultancies or lecture fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, GSK, Grunenthal, Pfizer, Novartis, and UCB. Nasser M. Al-Daaghri, Antonella Fioravanti, Sara Cheleschi, Jean-Pierre Pelletier, Maarten de Wit, Etienne Cavalier, Radmila Matijevic, Germain Honvo, Régis Pierre Radermecker, René Rizzoli, Jaime Branco, Andrea Laslop, María Concepción Prieto Yerro, Alberto Migliore, Gabriel Herrero-Beaumont, and Nicholas R. Fuggle declare that they have no conflicts of interest. Publisher Copyright: © 2022, The Author(s).Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common and disabling medical conditions. In the case of moderate to severe pain, a single intervention may not be sufficient to allay symptoms and improve quality of life. Examples include first-line, background therapy with symptomatic slow-acting drugs for OA (SYSADOAs) or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Therefore, the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) performed a review of a multimodal/multicomponent approach for knee OA therapy. This strategy is a particularly appropriate solution for the management of patients affected by knee OA, including those with pain and dysfunction reaching various thresholds at the different joints. The multimodal/multicomponent approach should be based, firstly, on different combinations of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions. Potential pharmacological combinations include SYSADOAs and NSAIDs, NSAIDs and weak opioids, and intra-articular treatments with SYSADOAs/NSAIDs. Based on the available evidence, most combined treatments provide benefit beyond single agents for the improvement of pain and other symptoms typical of knee OA, although further high-quality studies are required. In this work, we have therefore provided new, patient-centered perspectives for the management of knee OA, based on the concept that a multimodal, multicomponent, multidisciplinary approach, applied not only to non-pharmacological treatments but also to a combination of the currently available pharmacological options, will better meet the needs and expectations of patients with knee OA, who may present with various phenotypes and trajectories.publishersversionpublishe

The Eighteenth Data Release of the Sloan Digital Sky Surveys: Targeting and First Spectra from SDSS-V

The eighteenth data release of the Sloan Digital Sky Surveys (SDSS) is the first one for SDSS-V, the fifth generation of the survey. SDSS-V comprises three primary scientific programs, or "Mappers": Milky Way Mapper (MWM), Black Hole Mapper (BHM), and Local Volume Mapper (LVM). This data release contains extensive targeting information for the two multi-object spectroscopy programs (MWM and BHM), including input catalogs and selection functions for their numerous scientific objectives. We describe the production of the targeting databases and their calibration- and scientifically-focused components. DR18 also includes ~25,000 new SDSS spectra and supplemental information for X-ray sources identified by eROSITA in its eFEDS field. We present updates to some of the SDSS software pipelines and preview changes anticipated for DR19. We also describe three value-added catalogs (VACs) based on SDSS-IV data that have been published since DR17, and one VAC based on the SDSS-V data in the eFEDS field.Comment: Accepted to ApJ

The eighteenth data release of the Sloan Digital Sky Surveys : targeting and first spectra from SDSS-V

The eighteenth data release of the Sloan Digital Sky Surveys (SDSS) is the first one for SDSS-V, the fifth generation of the survey. SDSS-V comprises three primary scientific programs, or "Mappers": Milky Way Mapper (MWM), Black Hole Mapper (BHM), and Local Volume Mapper (LVM). This data release contains extensive targeting information for the two multi-object spectroscopy programs (MWM and BHM), including input catalogs and selection functions for their numerous scientific objectives. We describe the production of the targeting databases and their calibration- and scientifically-focused components. DR18 also includes ~25,000 new SDSS spectra and supplemental information for X-ray sources identified by eROSITA in its eFEDS field. We present updates to some of the SDSS software pipelines and preview changes anticipated for DR19. We also describe three value-added catalogs (VACs) based on SDSS-IV data that have been published since DR17, and one VAC based on the SDSS-V data in the eFEDS field.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

The role of osteoarthritis severity, BMI and age on clinical efficacy of bone marrow aspirate concentrate in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess whether BMI, severity of knee osteoarthritis, age and gender have any influence on the final clinical results of bone marrow aspirate concentrate injection. Method: A total of 111 study participants with painful knee osteoarthritis and different characteristics concerning before mentioned factors underwent bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) therapy and were followed up for 1 year. Result: Significant pain and functional improvement were observed in all participant groups. Participants' age and BMI did not influence the clinical outcome, but there was an influence of OA severity, especially among older patients. Conclusion: This study shows that BMAC therapy is effective. Younger patients with milder OA changes could be better candidates for long-lasting and more efficient BMAC therapy. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03825133 (ClinicalTrials.gov)

The role of osteoarthritis severity, BMI and age on clinical efficacy of bone marrow aspirate concentrate in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess whether BMI, severity of knee osteoarthritis, age and gender have any influence on the final clinical results of bone marrow aspirate concentrate injection. Method: A total of 111 study participants with painful knee osteoarthritis and different characteristics concerning before mentioned factors underwent bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) therapy and were followed up for 1 year. Result: Significant pain and functional improvement were observed in all participant groups. Participants' age and BMI did not influence the clinical outcome, but there was an influence of OA severity, especially among older patients. Conclusion: This study shows that BMAC therapy is effective. Younger patients with milder OA changes could be better candidates for long-lasting and more efficient BMAC therapy. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03825133 (ClinicalTrials.gov)

Multimodal Multidisciplinary Management of Patients with Moderate to Severe Pain in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Need to Meet Patient Expectations

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common and disabling medical conditions. In the case of moderate to severe pain, a single intervention may not be sufficient to allay symptoms and improve quality of life. Examples include first-line, background therapy with symptomatic slow-acting drugs for OA (SYSADOAs) or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Therefore, the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) performed a review of a multimodal/multicomponent approach for knee OA therapy. This strategy is a particularly appropriate solution for the management of patients affected by knee OA, including those with pain and dysfunction reaching various thresholds at the different joints. The multimodal/multicomponent approach should be based, firstly, on different combinations of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions. Potential pharmacological combinations include SYSADOAs and NSAIDs, NSAIDs and weak opioids, and intra-articular treatments with SYSADOAs/NSAIDs. Based on the available evidence, most combined treatments provide benefit beyond single agents for the improvement of pain and other symptoms typical of knee OA, although further high-quality studies are required. In this work, we have therefore provided new, patient-centered perspectives for the management of knee OA, based on the concept that a multimodal, multicomponent, multidisciplinary approach, applied not only to non-pharmacological treatments but also to a combination of the currently available pharmacological options, will better meet the needs and expectations of patients with knee OA, who may present with various phenotypes and trajectories

Multimodal multidisciplinary management of patients with moderate to severe pain in knee osteoarthritis:a need to meet patient expectations

Abstract Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common and disabling medical conditions. In the case of moderate to severe pain, a single intervention may not be sufficient to allay symptoms and improve quality of life. Examples include first-line, background therapy with symptomatic slow-acting drugs for OA (SYSADOAs) or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Therefore, the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases (ESCEO) performed a review of a multimodal/multicomponent approach for knee OA therapy. This strategy is a particularly appropriate solution for the management of patients affected by knee OA, including those with pain and dysfunction reaching various thresholds at the different joints. The multimodal/multicomponent approach should be based, firstly, on different combinations of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions. Potential pharmacological combinations include SYSADOAs and NSAIDs, NSAIDs and weak opioids, and intra-articular treatments with SYSADOAs/NSAIDs. Based on the available evidence, most combined treatments provide benefit beyond single agents for the improvement of pain and other symptoms typical of knee OA, although further high-quality studies are required. In this work, we have therefore provided new, patient-centered perspectives for the management of knee OA, based on the concept that a multimodal, multicomponent, multidisciplinary approach, applied not only to non-pharmacological treatments but also to a combination of the currently available pharmacological options, will better meet the needs and expectations of patients with knee OA, who may present with various phenotypes and trajectories

The eighteenth data release of the Sloan Digital Sky Surveys:targeting and first spectra from SDSS-V

The eighteenth data release of the Sloan Digital Sky Surveys (SDSS) is the first one for SDSS-V, the fifth generation of the survey. SDSS-V comprises three primary scientific programs, or "Mappers": Milky Way Mapper (MWM), Black Hole Mapper (BHM), and Local Volume Mapper (LVM). This data release contains extensive targeting information for the two multi-object spectroscopy programs (MWM and BHM), including input catalogs and selection functions for their numerous scientific objectives. We describe the production of the targeting databases and their calibration- and scientifically-focused components. DR18 also includes ~25,000 new SDSS spectra and supplemental information for X-ray sources identified by eROSITA in its eFEDS field. We present updates to some of the SDSS software pipelines and preview changes anticipated for DR19. We also describe three value-added catalogs (VACs) based on SDSS-IV data that have been published since DR17, and one VAC based on the SDSS-V data in the eFEDS field

A randomized trial of planned cesarean or vaginal delivery for twin pregnancy

Background: Twin birth is associated with a higher risk of adverse perinatal outcomes than singleton birth. It is unclear whether planned cesarean section results in a lower risk of adverse outcomes than planned vaginal delivery in twin pregnancy.\ud \ud Methods: We randomly assigned women between 32 weeks 0 days and 38 weeks 6 days of gestation with twin pregnancy and with the first twin in the cephalic presentation to planned cesarean section or planned vaginal delivery with cesarean only if indicated. Elective delivery was planned between 37 weeks 5 days and 38 weeks 6 days of gestation. The primary outcome was a composite of fetal or neonatal death or serious neonatal morbidity, with the fetus or infant as the unit of analysis for the statistical comparison.\ud \ud Results: A total of 1398 women (2795 fetuses) were randomly assigned to planned cesarean delivery and 1406 women (2812 fetuses) to planned vaginal delivery. The rate of cesarean delivery was 90.7% in the planned-cesarean-delivery group and 43.8% in the planned-vaginal-delivery group. Women in the planned-cesarean-delivery group delivered earlier than did those in the planned-vaginal-delivery group (mean number of days from randomization to delivery, 12.4 vs. 13.3; P = 0.04). There was no significant difference in the composite primary outcome between the planned-cesarean-delivery group and the planned-vaginal-delivery group (2.2% and 1.9%, respectively; odds ratio with planned cesarean delivery, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.77 to 1.74; P = 0.49).\ud \ud Conclusion: In twin pregnancy between 32 weeks 0 days and 38 weeks 6 days of gestation, with the first twin in the cephalic presentation, planned cesarean delivery did not significantly decrease or increase the risk of fetal or neonatal death or serious neonatal morbidity, as compared with planned vaginal delivery