Tuhina Neogi

2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative

Objective The 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR; formerly the American Rheumatism Association) classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been criticised for their lack of sensitivity in early disease. This work was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for RA. Methods A joint working group from the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism developed, in three phases, a new approach to classifying RA. The work focused on identifying, among patients newly presenting with undifferentiated inflammatory synovitis, factors that best discriminated between those who were and those who were not at high risk for persistent and/or erosive disease—this being the appropriate current paradigm underlying the disease construct ‘RA’. Results In the new criteria set, classification as ‘definite RA’ is based on the confirmed presence of synovitis in at least one joint, absence of an alternative diagnosis better explaining the synovitis, and achievement of a total score of 6 or greater (of a possible 10) from the individual scores in four domains: number and site of involved joints (range 0–5), serological abnormality (range 0–3), elevated acute-phase response (range 0–1) and symptom duration (two levels; range 0–1). Conclusion This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features. This will refocus attention on the important need for earlier diagnosis and institution of effective disease-suppressing therapy to prevent or minimise the occurrence of the undesirable sequelae that currently comprise the paradigm underlying the disease construct ‘RA’.

2012 American College of Rheumatology Guidelines for Management of Gout. Part 1: Systematic Nonpharmacologic and Pharmacologic Therapeutic Approaches to Hyperuricemia

DINESH KHANNA, JOHN D. FITZGERALD, PUJA P. KHANNA, SANGMEE BAE, MANJIT K. SINGH, TUHINA NEOGI, MICHAEL H. PILLINGER, JOAN MERILL, SUSAN LEE, SHRADDHA PRAKASH, MARIAN KALDAS, MANEESH GOGIA, FERNANDO PEREZ-RUIZ, WILL TAYLOR, FREDERIC LIOTE, HYON CHOI, JASVINDER A. SINGH, NICOLA DALBETH, SANFORD KAPLAN, VANDANA NIYYAR, DANIELLE JONES, STEVEN A. YAROWS, BLAKE ROESSLER, GAIL KERR, CHARLES KING, GERALD LEVY, DANIEL E. FURST, N. LAWRENCE EDWARDS, BRIAN MANDELL, H. RALPH SCHUMACHER, MARK ROBBINS, NEIL WENGER, AND ROBERT TERKELTAUB

2012 American College of Rheumatology guidelines for management of gout. Part 2: Therapy and antiinflammatory prophylaxis of acute gouty arthritis

In response to a request for proposal from the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), our group was charged with developing non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic guidelines for treatments in gout that are safe and effective, i.e., with acceptable risk-benefit ratio. These guidelines for the management and anti-inflammatory prophylaxis of acute attacks of gouty arthritis complements our manuscript on guidelines to treat hyperuricemia in patients with evidence of gout (or gouty arthritis) (1). Gout is the most common cause of inflammatory arthritis in adults in the USA. Clinical manifestations in joints and bursa are superimposed on top of local deposition of monosodium urate crystals. Acute gout characteristically presents as self-limited, attack of synovitis (also called “gout flares”). Acute gout attacks account for a major component of the reported decreased health-related quality of life in patients with gout (2, 3). Acute gout attacks can be debilitating and are associated with decreased work productivity (4, 5). Urate lowering therapy (ULT) is a cornerstone in the management of gout, and, when effective in lowering serum urate (SUA), is associated with decreased risk of acute gouty attacks (6). However, during the initial phase of ULT, there is an early increase in acute gout attacks, which has been hypothesized due to remodeling of articular urate crystal deposits as a result of rapid and substantial lowering of ambient urate concentrations (7). Acute gout attacks attributable to the initiation of ULT may contribute to non-adherence in long-term gout treatment, as reported in recent studies (8). In order to systematically evaluate a broad spectrum of acute gouty arthritis, we generated multifaceted case scenarios to elucidate decision making based primarily on clinical and laboratory test-based data that can be obtained in a gout patient by both non-specialist and specialist health care providers in an office practice setting. This effort was not intended to create a novel classification system of gout, or new gout diagnostic criteria, as such endeavors are beyond the scope of this work. Prior gout recommendations and guidelines, at the independent (i.e, non pharmaceutical industry-sponsored) national or multinational rheumatology society level, have been published by EULAR (9, 10), the Dutch College of General Practitioners (11), and the British Society for Rheumatology (BSR)(12). The ACR requested new guidelines, in view of the increasing prevalence of gout (13), the clinical complexity of management of gouty arthritis imposed by co-morbidities common in gout patients (14), and increasing numbers of treatment options via clinical development of agents(15–17). The ACR charged us to develop these guidelines to be useful for both rheumatologists and other health care providers on an international level. As such, this process and resultant recommendations, involved a diverse and international panel of experts. In this manuscript, we concentrate on 2 of the 4 gout domains that the ACR requested for evaluation of pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic management approaches: (i) analgesic and anti-inflammatory management of acute attacks of gouty arthritis, and (ii) pharmacologic anti-inflammatory prophylaxis of acute attacks of gouty arthritis. Part I of the guidelines focused on systematic non-pharmacologic measures (patient education, diet and lifestyle choices, identification and management of co-morbidities) that impact on hyperuricemia, and made recommendations on pharmacologic ULT in a broad range of case scenarios of patients with disease activity manifested by acute and chronic forms of gouty arthritis, including chronic tophaceous gouty arthropathy(1). Each individual and specific statement is designated as a “recommendation”, in order to reflect the non-prescriptive nature of decision making for the hypothetical clinical scenarios. So that the voting panel could focus on gout treatment decisions, a number of key assumptions were made, as described in Part I of the guidelines (1). Importantly, each proposed recommendation assumed that correct diagnoses of gout and acute gouty arthritis attacks had been made for the voting scenario in question. For treatment purposes, it was also assumed that treating clinicians were competent, and considered underlying medical comorbidities (including diabetes, gastrointestinal disease, hypertension, and hepatic, cardiac, and renal disease), and potential drug toxicities and drug-drug interactions, when making both treatment choicesand dosing decisions on chosen pharmacologic interventions. The RAND/UCLA methodology used here emphasizes level of evidence, safety, and quality of therapy, and excludes analyses of societal cost of health care. As such, the ACR gout guidelines are designed to reflect best practice, supported either by level of evidence or consensus-based decision-making. These guidelines cannot substitute for individualized, direct assessment of the patient, coupled with clinical decision making by a competent health care practitioner. The motivation, financial circumstances, and preferences of the gout patient also need to be considered in clinical practice, and it is incumbent on the treating clinician to weigh the issues not addressed by this methodology, such as treatment costs, when making management decisions. Last, the guidelines for gout management presented herein were not designed to determine eligibility for health care cost coverage by third party payers.

Association between radiographic features of knee osteoarthritis and pain: results from two cohort studies

Objective To examine the relation of radiographic features of osteoarthritis to knee pain in people with knees discordant for knee pain in two cohorts. Design Within person, knee matched, case-control study. Setting and participants Participants in the Multicenter Osteoarthritis (MOST) and Framingham Osteoarthritis studies who had knee radiographs and assessments of knee pain. Main outcome measures Association of each pain measure (frequency, consistency, and severity) with radiographic osteoarthritis, as assessed by Kellgren and Lawrence grade (0-4) and osteophyte and joint space narrowing grades (0-3) among matched sets of two knees within individual participants whose knees were discordant for pain status. Results 696 people from MOST and 336 people from Framingham were included. Kellgren and Lawrence grades were strongly associated with frequent knee pain—for example, for Kellgren and Lawrence grade 4 v grade 0 the odds ratio for pain was 151 (95% confidence interval 43 to 526) in MOST and 73 (16 to 331) in Framingham (both P<0.001 for trend). Similar results were also seen for the relation of Kellgren and Lawrence scores to consistency and severity of knee pain. Joint space narrowing was more strongly associated with each pain measure than were osteophytes. Conclusions Using a method that minimises between person confounding, this study found that radiographic osteoarthritis and individual radiographic features of osteoarthritis were strongly associated with knee pain.

Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity Measures: American College of Rheumatology Recommendations for Use in Clinical Practice

Although the systematic measurement of disease activity facilitates clinical decision making in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), no recommendations currently exist on which measures should be applied in clinical practice in the US. The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) convened a Working Group (WG) to comprehensively evaluate the validity, feasibility, and acceptability of available RA disease activity measures and derive recommendations for their use in clinical practice.

The epidemiology and impact of pain in osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis and a leading cause of disability worldwide, largely due to pain, the primary symptom of the disease. The pain experience in knee OA in particular is well-recognized as typically transitioning from intermittent weight-bearing pain to a more persistent, chronic pain. Methods to validly assess pain in OA studies have been developed to address the complex nature of the pain experience. The etiology of pain in OA is recognized to be multifactorial, with both intra-articular and extra-articular risk factors. Nonetheless, greater insights are needed into pain mechanisms in OA to enable rational mechanism-based management of pain. Consequences of pain related to OA contribute to a substantial socioeconomic burden.

Prevalence of abnormalities in knees detected by MRI in adults without knee osteoarthritis: population based observational study (Framingham Osteoarthritis Study)

Objective To examine use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of knees with no radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis to determine the prevalence of structural lesions associated with osteoarthritis and their relation to age, sex, and obesity. Design Population based observational study. Setting Community cohort in Framingham, MA, United States (Framingham osteoarthritis study). Participants 710 people aged >50 who had no radiographic evidence of knee osteoarthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence grade 0) and who underwent MRI of the knee. Main outcome measures Prevalence of MRI findings that are suggestive of knee osteoarthritis (osteophytes, cartilage damage, bone marrow lesions, subchondral cysts, meniscal lesions, synovitis, attrition, and ligamentous lesions) in all participants and after stratification by age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and the presence or absence of knee pain. Pain was assessed by three different questions and also by WOMAC questionnaire. Results Of the 710 participants, 393 (55%) were women, 660 (93%) were white, and 206 (29%) had knee pain in the past month. The mean age was 62.3 years and mean BMI was 27.9. Prevalence of “any abnormality” was 89% (631/710) overall. Osteophytes were the most common abnormality among all participants (74%, 524/710), followed by cartilage damage (69%, 492/710) and bone marrow lesions (52%, 371/710). The higher the age, the higher the prevalence of all types of abnormalities detectable by MRI. There were no significant differences in the prevalence of any of the features between BMI groups. The prevalence of at least one type of pathology (“any abnormality”) was high in both painful (90-97%, depending on pain definition) and painless (86-88%) knees. Conclusions MRI shows lesions in the tibiofemoral joint in most middle aged and elderly people in whom knee radiographs do not show any features of osteoarthritis, regardless of pain.

Epidemiology of OA

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis in the United States and is a leading cause of disability. It is typically defined in epidemiologic studies by radiographic findings and consideration of symptoms. Its incidence and prevalence are rising, likely related to the aging of the population and increasing obesity. Risk factors for OA include numerous person-level factors, such as age, sex, obesity, and genetics, as well as joint-specific factors that are likely reflective of abnormal loading of the joints. In studying OA, several methodologic challenges exist that can hamper our ability to identify pertinent relationships.

2015 Gout Classification Criteria: An American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Collaborative Initiative

Existing criteria for the classification of gout have suboptimal sensitivity and/or specificity, and were developed at a time when advanced imaging was not available. The current effort was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for gout.

Randomized Exercise Trial of Aromatase Inhibitor-Induced Arthralgia in Breast Cancer Survivors

PURPOSE Arthralgia occurs in up to 50% of breast cancer survivors treated with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) and is the most common reason for poor AI adherence. We conducted, in 121 breast cancer survivors receiving an AI and reporting arthralgia, a yearlong randomized trial of the impact of exercise versus usual care on arthralgia severity. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligibility criteria included receiving an AI for at least 6 months, reporting ≥ 3 of 10 for worst joint pain on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), and reporting < 90 minutes per week of aerobic exercise and no strength training. Participants were randomly assigned to exercise (150 minutes per week of aerobic exercise and supervised strength training twice per week) or usual care. The BPI, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire were completed at baseline and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Intervention effects were evaluated using mixed-model repeated measures analysis, with change at 12 months as the primary end point. RESULTS Over 12 months, women randomly assigned to exercise (n = 61) attended 70% (± standard deviation [SD], 28%) of resistance training sessions and increased their exercise by 159 (± SD, 136) minutes per week. Worst joint pain scores decreased by 1.6 points (29%) at 12 months among women randomly assigned to exercise versus a 0.2-point increase (3%) among those receiving usual care (n = 60; P < .001). Pain severity and interference, as well as DASH and WOMAC pain scores, also decreased significantly at 12 months in women randomly assigned to exercise, compared with increases for those receiving usual care (all P < .001). CONCLUSION Exercise led to improvement in AI-induced arthralgia in previously inactive breast cancer survivors.