Elizabeth R. Volkmann

2012 Update of the 2008 American College of Rheumatology recommendations for the use of disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs and biologic agents in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis

The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) most recently published recommendations for use of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and biologics in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in 2008 (1). These recommendations covered indications for use, monitoring of side-effects, assessment of the clinical response to DMARDs and biologics, screening for tuberculosis (TB), and assessment of the roles of cost and patient preference in decision-making for biologic agents (1). Recognizing the rapidly evolving knowledge in RA management and the accumulation of new evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of existing and newer therapies, the ACR commissioned an update of the 2008 recommendations in select topic areas. The 2012 revision updates the 2008 ACR recommendations in the following areas: (1) indications for DMARDs and biologics; (2) switching between DMARD and biologic therapies; (3) use of biologics in high-risk patients (those with hepatitis, congestive heart failure, and malignancy); (4) screening for TB in patients starting or currently receiving biologics; and (5) vaccination in patients starting or currently receiving DMARDs or biologics (Table 1). Table 1 Overview Comparison of Topics and Medications Included in the 2008 and 2012 ACR RA Recommendations METHODS We utilized the same methodology as described in detail in the 2008 guidelines (1) to maintain consistency and to allow cumulative evidence to inform this 2012 recommendation update. These recommendations were developed by two expert panels: (1) a non-voting working group and Core Expert Panel (CEP) of clinicians and methodologists responsible for the selection of the relevant topic areas to be considered, the systematic literature review, and the evidence synthesis and creation of “clinical scenarios”; and (2) a Task Force Panel (TFP) of 11 internationally-recognized expert clinicians, patient representatives and methodologists with expertise in RA treatment, evidence-based medicine and patient preferences who were tasked with rating the scenarios created using an ordinal scale specified in the Research and Development/University of California at Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) Appropriateness method (2–4). This method solicited formal input from a multi-disciplinary TFP panel to make recommendations informed by the evidence. The methods used to develop the updated ACR recommendations are described briefly below. Systematic Literature Review – Sources, Databases and Domains Literature searches for both DMARDs and biologics relied predominantly on PubMed searches) with medical subject headings (MeSH) and relevant keywords similar to those used for the 2008 ACR RA recommendations (see Appendices 1 and 2). We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), quasi-experimental designs, cohort studies (prospective or retrospective), and case-control studies, with no restrictions on sample size. More details about inclusion criteria are listed below and in Appendix 3. The 2008 recommendations were based on a literature search that ended on February 14, 2007. The literature search end date for the 2012 Update was February 26, 2010 for the efficacy and safety studies and September 22, 2010 for additional qualitative reviews related to TB screening, immunization and hepatitis (similar to the 2008 methodology). Studies published subsequent to that date were not included. For biologics, we also reviewed the Cochrane systematic reviews and overviews (published and in press) in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify additional studies (5–8) and further supplemented by hand-checking the bibliographies of all included articles. Finally, the CEP and TFP confirmed that relevant literature was included for evidence synthesis. Unless they were identified by the literature search and met the article inclusion criteria (see Appendix 3), we did not review any unpublished data from product manufacturers, investigators, or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System. We searched the literature for the eight DMARDs and nine biologics most commonly used for the treatment of RA. Literature was searched for eight DMARDS including azathioprine, cyclosporine, hydroxychloroquine, leflunomide, methotrexate, minocycline, organic gold compounds and sulfasalazine. As in 2008, azathioprine, cyclosporine and gold were not included in the recommendations based on infrequent use and lack of new data (Table 1). Literature was searched for nine biologics including abatacept, adalimumab, anakinra, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, rituximab and tocilizumab; anakinra was not included in the recommendations due to infrequent use and lack of new data. Details of the bibliographic search strategy are listed in Appendix 1.

American College of Rheumatology 2010 recommendations for the prevention and treatment of glucocorticoid‐induced osteoporosis

Guidelines and recommendations developed and/or endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) are intended to provide guidance for particular patterns of practice and not to dictate the care of a particular patient. The ACR considers adherence to these guidelines and recommendations to be voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding their application to be made by the physician in light of each patient’s individual circumstances. Guidelines and recommendations are intended to promote beneficial or desirable outcomes but cannot guarantee any specific outcome. Guidelines and recommendations developed or endorsed by the ACR are subject to periodic revision as warranted by the evolution of medical knowledge, technology, and practice.

Dysfunctional Proinflammatory High-Density Lipoproteins Confer Increased Risk of Atherosclerosis in Women With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

OBJECTIVE Women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have an increased risk of atherosclerosis. Identification of at-risk patients and the etiology underlying atherosclerosis in SLE remain elusive. The antioxidant capacity of normal high-density lipoproteins (HDLs) is lost during inflammation, and these dysfunctional HDLs might predispose individuals to atherosclerosis. The aim of this study was to determine whether dysfunctional proinflammatory HDL (piHDL) is associated with subclinical atherosclerosis in SLE. METHODS Carotid artery ultrasound was performed in 276 women with SLE to identify carotid plaques and measure intima-media thickness (IMT). The antioxidant function of HDL was measured as the change in oxidation of low-density lipoprotein after the addition of HDL cholesterol. Two antiinflammatory HDL components, paraoxonase 1 and apolipoprotein A-I, were also measured. RESULTS Among the SLE patients, 48.2% were determined to have piHDL on carotid ultrasound, while 86.7% of patients with plaque had piHDL compared with 40.7% of those without plaque (P<0.001). Patients with piHDL also had a higher IMT (P<0.001). After multivariate analysis, the only factors found to be significantly associated with plaque were the presence of piHDL (odds ratio [OR] 16.1, P<0.001), older age (OR 1.2, P<0.001), hypertension (OR 3.0, P=0.04), dyslipidemia (OR 3.4, P=0.04), and mixed racial background (OR 8.3, P=0.04). Factors associated with IMT measurements in the highest quartile were the presence of piHDL (OR 2.5, P=0.02), older age (OR 1.1, P<0.001), a higher body mass index (OR 1.07, P=0.04), a cumulative lifetime prednisone dose>or=20 gm (OR 2.9, P=0.04), and African American race (OR 8.3, P=0.001). CONCLUSION Dysfunctional piHDL greatly increases the risk of developing subclinical atherosclerosis in SLE. The presence of piHDL was associated with an increased prevalence of carotid plaque and with a higher IMT. Therefore, determination of piHDL may help identify patients at risk for atherosclerosis.

Mycophenolate mofetil versus oral cyclophosphamide in scleroderma-related interstitial lung disease (SLS II): a randomised controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial

Summary BACKGROUND Twelve months of oral cyclophosphamide (CYC) has been shown to alter the progression of scleroderma-related interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD) when compared to placebo. However, toxicity was a concern and without continued treatment the efficacy disappeared by 24 months. We hypothesized that a two-year course of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) would be safer, better tolerated and produce longer lasting improvements than CYC. METHODS Patients with SSc-ILD meeting defined dyspnea, pulmonary function and high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) criteria were randomized in a double-blind, two-arm trial at 14 medical centers. MMF (target dose 1500 mg twice daily) was administered for 24 months in one arm and oral CYC (target dose 2·0 mg/kg/day) administered for 12 months followed by placebo for 12 months in the other arm. The primary endpoint, change in forced vital capacity as a percent of the predicted normal value (FVC %) over the course of 24 months, was assessed in a modified intention-to-treat analysis using an inferential joint model combining a mixed effects model for longitudinal outcomes and a survival model to handle non-ignorable missing data. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00883129, and is closed. RESULTS Between November, 2009, and January, 2013, 142 patients were randomized. 126 patients (63 MMF; 63 CYC) with acceptable baseline HRCT studies and at least one outcome measure were included in the analysis. The adjusted FVC % (primary endpoint) improved from baseline to 24 months by 2.17 in the MMF arm (95% CI, 0.53–3.84) and 2·86 in the CYC arm (95% confidence interval 1·19–4·58) with no significant between-treatment difference (p=0·24), indicating that the trial was negative for the primary endpoint. However, in a post-hoc analysis of the primary endpoint, within-treatment improvements from baseline to 24 months were noted in both the CYC and MMF arms. A greater number of patients on CYC than on MMF prematurely withdrew from study drug (32 vs 20) and failed treatment (2 vs 0), and the time to stopping treatment was significantly shorter in the CYC arm (p=0·019). Sixteen deaths occurred (11 CYC; 5 MMF) with most due to progressive ILD. Leukopenia (30 vs 4 patients) and thrombocytopenia (4 vs 0 patients) occurred more often in patients treated with CYC. In post-hoc analyses, within- (but not between-) treatment improvements were also noted in defined secondary outcomes including skin score, dyspnea and whole-lung HRCT scores. INTERPRETATION Treatment of SSc-ILD with MMF for two years or CYC for one year both resulted in significant improvements in pre-specified measures of lung function, dyspnea, lung imaging, and skin disease over the 2-year course of the study. While MMF was better tolerated and associated with less toxicity, the hypothesis that it would have greater efficacy at 24 months than CYC was not confirmed. These findings support the potential clinical impact of both CYC and MMF for progressive SSc-ILD, as well as the current preference for MMF due to its better tolerability and toxicity profile. FUNDING National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute/National Institutes of Health with drug supply provided by Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.

Low Physical Activity is Associated with Proinflammatory High Density Lipoprotein and Increased Subclinical Atherosclerosis in Women with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

To investigate the association between physical activity, functional activity of high‐density lipoprotein (HDL), and subclinical cardiovascular disease in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

Lung Transplant Outcomes in Systemic Sclerosis with Significant Esophageal Dysfunction. A Comprehensive Single-Center Experience

RATIONALE Consideration of lung transplantation in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) remains guarded, often due to the concern for esophageal dysfunction and the associated potential for allograft injury and suboptimal post-lung transplantation outcomes. OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to systematically report our single-center experience regarding lung transplantation in the setting of SSc, with a particular focus on esophageal dysfunction. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed all lung transplants at our center from January 1, 2000 through August 31, 2012 (n = 562), comparing the SSc group (n = 35) to the following lung transplant diagnostic subsets: all non-SSc (n = 527), non-SSc diffuse fibrotic lung disease (n = 264), and a non-SSc matched group (n = 109). We evaluated post-lung transplant outcomes, including survival, primary graft dysfunction, acute rejection, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome, and microbiology of respiratory isolates. In addition, we defined severe esophageal dysfunction using esophageal manometry and esophageal morphometry criteria on the basis of chest computed tomography images. For patients with SSc referred for lung transplant but subsequently denied (n = 36), we queried the reason(s) for denial with respect to the concern for esophageal dysfunction. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS The 1-, 3-, and 5-year post-lung transplant survival for SSc was 94, 77, and 70%, respectively, and similar to the other groups. The remaining post-lung transplant outcomes evaluated were also similar between SSc and the other groups. Approximately 60% of the SSc group had severe esophageal dysfunction. Pre-lung transplant chest computed tomography imaging demonstrated significantly abnormal esophageal morphometry for SSc when compared with the matched group. Importantly, esophageal dysfunction was the sole reason for lung transplant denial in a single case. CONCLUSIONS Relative to other lung transplant indications, our SSc group experienced comparable survival, primary graft dysfunction, acute rejection, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome, and microbiology of respiratory isolates, despite the high prevalence of severe esophageal dysfunction. Esophageal dysfunction rarely precluded active listing for lung transplantation.

Association of Systemic Sclerosis With a Unique Colonic Microbial Consortium.

To compare colonic microbial composition in systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients and healthy controls and to determine whether certain microbial genera are associated with gastrointestinal (GI) tract symptoms in patients with SSc.

Relationship between quantitative radiographic assessments of interstitial lung disease and physiological and clinical features of systemic sclerosis

Objectives Extent of systemic sclerosis (SSc)-related interstitial lung disease (ILD) assessed from thoracic high-resolution CT (HRCT) predicts disease course, mortality and treatment response. While quantitative HRCT analyses of extent of lung fibrosis (QLFib) or total interstitial lung disease (QILD) are more sensitive and reproducible than visual HRCT assessments of SSc-ILD, these analyses are not widely available. This study evaluates the relationship between clinical disease parameters and QLFib and QILD scores to identify potential surrogate measures of radiographic extent of ILD. Methods Using baseline data from the Scleroderma Lung Study I (SLS I; N=158), multivariate regression analyses were performed using the best subset selection method to identify one to five variable models that best correlated with QLFib and QILD scores in both whole lung (WL) and the zone of maximal involvement (ZM). These models were subsequently validated using baseline data from SLS II (N=142). Bivariate analyses of the radiographic and clinical variables were also performed using pooled data. SLS I and II did not include patients with clinically significant pulmonary hypertension (PH). Results Diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) was the single best predictor of both QLF and QILD in the WL and ZM in all of the best subset models. Adding other disease parameters to the models did not substantially improve model performance. Forced vital capacity (FVC) did not predict QLF or QILD scores in any of the models. Conclusions In the absence of PH, DLCO provides the best overall estimate of HRCT-measured lung disease in patients from two large SSc cohorts. FVC, although commonly used, may not be the best surrogate measure of extent of SSc-ILD at any point in time. Trial registration numbers SLS I: www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT 00000-4563; SLS II: www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT 00883129.

Mycophenolate Mofetil Versus Placebo for Systemic Sclerosis–Related Interstitial Lung Disease: An Analysis of Scleroderma Lung Studies I and II

To compare mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) with placebo for the treatment of systemic sclerosis (SSc)–related interstitial lung disease (ILD).

Systemic sclerosis is associated with a unique colonic microbial consortium

To compare colonic microbial composition in systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients and healthy controls and to determine whether certain microbial genera are associated with gastrointestinal (GI) tract symptoms in patients with SSc.