Veena K. Ranganath

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.

Systematic Review: Comparative Effectiveness of Treatments to Prevent Fractures in Men and Women with Low Bone Density or Osteoporosis

Context Sorting through the proven benefits and harms of the agents available for treating osteoporosis is difficult. Contribution This systematic review of 76 randomized trials and 24 meta-analyses found good evidence that multiple agents, including alendronate, zoledronic acid, and estrogen, prevented vertebral and hip fractures more than placebo. Harms included increased risk for thromboembolic events with raloxifene, estrogen, and estrogenprogestin and increased gastrointestinal symptoms with bisphosphonates. No large trials directly compared 2 or more agents and established superiority of any agent. Implication Available data insufficiently characterize the benefits and harms of various therapies for osteoporosis relative to one another. The Editors Osteoporosis is a systemic skeletal disease characterized by low bone mass and microarchitectural deterioration of bone tissue, with a consequent increase in bone fragility and susceptibility to fracture (1). Approximately 44 million people in the United States are affected by osteoporosis and low bone mass (2). The clinical complications include fractures, disability, and chronic pain. About 54% of women age 50 years or older will have an osteoporotic fracture during their lifetime (3). Furthermore, approximately 4% of patients older than 50 years of age who have a hip fracture die while in the hospital and 24% die within 1 year after the hip fracture (4). The economic burden of osteoporosis is large and growing. Most estimates are based on the cost of fracture alone: A 1995 estimate of costs incurred by osteoporotic fractures in the United States was

Sleep loss exacerbates fatigue, depression, and pain in rheumatoid arthritis.

13.8 billion (5). A 2003 review estimated the total costs in the United States at

Cholesterol efflux by high density lipoproteins is impaired in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis

17 billion (6). Although the bulk of these costs were incurred by retired individuals older than age 65 years, direct costs and work loss are significant among employed postmenopausal women (7). The increasing prevalence and cost of osteoporosis have heightened interest in the efficacy and safety of the many agents available to treat the loss of bone mineral associated with osteoporosis. This systematic review, developed under the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Effective Health Care Program, describes the benefits in fracture reduction and the harms from adverse events among and within the various classes of pharmacotherapies for osteoporosis. The agents evaluated were bisphosphonates (alendronate, etidronate, ibandronate, pamidronate, risedronate, and zoledronic acid), calcitonin, estrogen, teriparatide, selective estrogen receptor modulators (raloxifene and tamoxifen), testosterone, and vitamins (vitamin D) and minerals (calcium). Methods We followed a standardized protocol for the review. The full technical report (8) provides detailed methods, evidence tables, and risk estimates for individual studies. The full report also enumerates studies included in the meta-analyses described in this review. Data Sources and Study Selection We searched MEDLINE (1966 to December 2006), the ACP Journal Club database, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (no date limits), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (no date limits), and the Web sites of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (no date limits) and Health Technology Assessment Programme (January 1998 to December 2006) for materials pertaining to the specified agents, limiting our searches to English-language publications and human studies. We first identified systematic reviews and meta-analyses of trials that reported pooled estimates of the effect of the agents on fracture risk. When such reviews were identified for specific agents, we truncated our searches for randomized trials to include only those published after the last search date used in the review or meta-analysis. We manually searched reference lists of all review articles obtained for any reports of original research not already identified, and we reviewed U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) medical and statistical reviews, scientific information packets from pharmaceutical companies, and additional studies recommended by our technical expert panel and by stakeholders during a public review period. To supplement the information in systematic reviews on estrogen, we reviewed the Womens Health Initiative and Heart and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study trials, as suggested by our technical expert panel. Finally, we conducted an additional search for large observational studies that reported any of the following adverse events: 1) cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction and stroke); 2) thromboembolic events (pulmonary embolism and venous thromboembolic events); 3) malignant conditions (breast cancer, colon cancer, lung cancer, and osteosarcoma); 4) upper gastrointestinal events (perforations, ulcers, bleeding, and esophageal ulcerations); and 5) osteonecrosis. The search was updated for this paper, but not for the full report, by searching MEDLINE (1 January 2007 to 10 November 2007) for large clinical trials that reported fracture outcomes for the specified agents. For information on efficacy, we selected meta-analyses that reported pooled risk estimates for fracture and randomized trials that compared any of the agents with placebo or with each other and reported fracture outcomes. For information on harms, we selected systematic reviews, randomized trials, and large casecontrol or cohort studies with more than 1000 participants. We also reviewed cases of osteonecrosis at AHRQs request. Data Extraction and Study Quality Two physicians independently abstracted data about study populations, interventions, follow-up, and outcome ascertainment by using a structured form. For each group in a randomized trial, a statistician extracted the sample size and number of persons who reported fractures. Two reviewers, under the supervision of the statistician, independently abstracted information about adverse events. Disagreements were resolved by the statistician or the principal investigator. Adverse events were recorded onto a spreadsheet that identified numbers of participants in each trial group and the description of the adverse event as listed in the original article. Each event was counted as if it represented a unique individual. Because an individual may have experienced more than 1 event within a category of adverse events (for example, both stroke and myocardial infarction), this assumption may have overestimated the number of people who had an adverse event in that category. If a trial report mentioned a particular type of adverse event but did not report data on it, we did not include the trial in that particular events analysis. In other words, we did not assume an occurrence of zero events unless it was specifically reported as such. By taking this approach, we may have overestimated the number of patients for whom a particular adverse event was observed. We used predefined criteria to assess the quality of systematic reviews and randomized trials, based on internal and external validity assessment detailed in the QUOROM (Quality of Reporting of Meta-Analyses) statement (9), and items related to randomization, blinding, and accounting for withdrawals and dropouts (10, 11). Each element is detailed in appendices to the full report (8). For this review, we characterized the overall strength of evidence for estimating fracture risk as good, fair, or weak on the basis of the characteristics previously described, as well as the number of studies, total number of participants across studies, whether fractures were a primary outcome, reproducibility of results across studies, and precision of the CIs surrounding the point estimates. Evidence was classified as good if the total sample size was greater than 1000, the results across all studies were consistent, and the studies were of high methodological quality. Evidence was classified as fair if results were inconsistent across the studies. The evidence was classified as weak if no studies assessed fracture as a primary outcome, the total sample size across studies was less than 500, and the CIs around the point estimates were wide and crossed null. Data Synthesis and Statistical Analysis Comparisons of interest were single agent versus placebo and single agent versus another agent for agents within the same class and across classes. We also compared estrogenprogestin versus placebo or single drugs. Studies that included either calcium or vitamin D in all study groups were classified as comparisons between the other agents in each group; for example, alendronate plus calcium versus risedronate plus calcium would be classified as alendronate versus risedronate. In this review, we summarize data on vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fractures; data on total, wrist, and humerus fractures are included in the full report (8). The number of people with at least 1 fracture was our primary outcome of interest. Because fractures rarely occurred and zero events were often observed in at least 1 treatment group, we calculated odds ratios (ORs) by using the Peto method (12). Trials with zero events in both groups have an undefined OR. Because fractures are rare events, the OR approximates the relative risk (RR) for fracture. We combined data from multiple study groups in an individual study to calculate a single OR for comparisons of interest. In these instances, the same outcome had been reported for each group, and the individuals in each group were unique. For example, to develop an OR for the risk for vertebral fractures regardless of dose, we combined the participants in the various dose groups and compared them with those in the placebo group. We conducted the meta-analysis by using StatXact PROCs (Cytel, Cambridge, Massachusetts) for SAS software (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina). Recognizing that characteristics of the study population may affect risk for fracture, we defined risk groups to categorize the

Comorbidities are associated with poorer outcomes in community patients with rheumatoid arthritis

STUDY OBJECTIVES Disturbances of sleep are hypothesized to contribute to pain. However, experimental data are limited to healthy pain-free individuals. This study evaluated the effect of sleep loss during part of the night on daytime mood symptoms and pain perceptions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in comparison with control subjects. DESIGN A between-groups laboratory study with assessment of mood symptoms and pain perception before and after partial night sleep deprivation (PSD; awake 23:00 hr to 03:00 hr). SETTING General clinical research center. PARTICIPANTS Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (n = 27) and volunteer comparison control subjects (n = 27). MEASUREMENTS Subjective reports of sleep, mood symptoms and pain, polysomnographic assessment of sleep continuity, and subjective and objective assessment of rheumatoid arthritis-specific joint pain. RESULTS PSD induced differential increases in self-reported fatigue (P < 0.09), depression (P < 0.04), anxiety (P < 0.04), and pain (P < 0.01) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis compared with responses in control subjects, in whom differential increases of self-reported pain were independent of changes in mood symptoms, subjective sleep quality, and objective measures of sleep fragmentation. In the patients with rheumatoid arthritis, PSD also induced increases in disease-specific activity as indexed by self-reported pain severity (P < 0.01) and number of painful joints (P < 0.02) as well as clinician-rated joint counts (P < 0.03). CONCLUSION This study provides the first evidence of an exaggerated increase in symptoms of mood and pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis after sleep loss, along with an activation of rheumatoid arthritis-related joint pain. Given the reciprocal relationship between sleep disturbances and pain, clinical management of pain in patients with rheumatoid arthritis should include an increased focus on the prevention and treatment of sleep disturbance in this clinical population.

Remission in rheumatoid arthritis.

Objectives Reverse cholesterol transport (RCT) is a major antiatherogenic function of high density lipoprotein (HDL). In the current work, the authors evaluated whether the RCT capacity of HDL from rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients is impaired when compared to healthy controls. Methods HDL was isolated from 40 patients with RA and 40 age and sex matched healthy controls. Assays of cholesterol efflux, HDLs antioxidant function and paraoxanase-1 (PON-1) activity were performed as described previously. Plasma myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity was assessed by a commercially available assay. Results Mean cholesterol efflux capacity of HDL was not significantly different between RA patients (40.2%±11.1%) and controls (39.5%±8.9%); p=0.75. However, HDL from RA patients with high disease activity measured by a disease activity score using 28 joint count (DAS28>5.1), had significantly decreased ability to promote cholesterol efflux compared to HDL from patients with very low disease activity/clinical remission (DAS28<2.6). Significant correlations were noted between cholesterol efflux and the DAS28 (r=−0.39, p=0.01) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate, (r=−0.41, p=0.0009). Higher plasma MPO activity was associated with worse HDL function (r=0.41/p=0.009 (antioxidant capacity); r=0.35, p=0.03 (efflux)). HDLs ability to promote cholesterol efflux was modestly but significantly correlated with its antioxidant function (r=−0.34, p=0.03). Conclusions The cholesterol efflux capacity of HDL is impaired in RA patients with high disease activity and is correlated with systemic inflammation and HDLs antioxidant capacity. Attenuation of HDL function, independent of HDL cholesterol levels, may suggest a mechanism by which active RA contributes to increased cardiovascular (CV) risk.

Comparison of composite measures of disease activity in an early seropositive rheumatoid arthritis cohort

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the impact of comorbidities on achieving remission by examining changes in the clinical disease activity index (CDAI) in RA patients in the community-based Consortium of Rheumatology Researchers of North America (CORRONA) registry. METHODS A subcohort of 1548 RA subjects with varying disease duration met the following inclusion criteria: started a DMARD/biologic agent, continued therapy ≥ 3 months, CDAI ≥ 2.8 at study entry and followed longitudinally from baseline to follow-up (mean time 7.46 months). Patients reported comorbidities according to a standardized list of 33 conditions. Entry characteristics were compared across age categories using one-way analysis of variance. Linear and logistic regression models were constructed to assess characteristics [e.g. age, disease duration, number of previous DMARDs/biologics, baseline modified health assessment questionnaire (MHAQ), baseline CDAI and number of comorbidities] associated with primary outcomes: change in CDAI (baseline to follow-up) and CDAI remission (yes/no). RESULTS Although disease activity measures at entry were similar across age categories, older patients had more comorbidities, less improvement in CDAI/MHAQ and were less likely to attain remission at follow-up. However, after adjusting covariates an increasing number of patient-reported comorbidities and higher baseline CDAI (but not age) were consistently and independently associated with a lower likelihood of clinical improvement or remission (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION In this observational cohort of community RA patients an increasing number of patients reported comorbidities, independently correlated with less CDAI improvement over time. These results reaffirm that comorbidities may be an important factor in consideration of treat-to-target recommendations and aid in understanding achievable RA therapeutic goals.

Association of paraoxonase 1 gene polymorphism and enzyme activity with carotid plaque in rheumatoid arthritis.

With advancing therapeutic options, achieving a state of remission has become the treatment goal in rheumatoid arthritis. Agreeing on what constitutes remission and what measures should be used to assess disease activity has remained a challenge. Multiple remission criteria have been devised and modified, all with different strengths and limitations. A consensus definition of remission will need to be achieved if we are to be able to evaluate outcomes of clinical trials and establish treatment targets for practice. Remission defined as the complete absence of disease currently may not be a realistic therapeutic goal.

Significance of sex in achieving sustained remission in the consortium of rheumatology researchers of North America cohort of rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Objective: To evaluate concordance and agreement of the original DAS44/ESR-4 item composite disease activity status measure with nine simpler derivatives when classifying patient responses by European League of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) criteria, using an early rheumatoid factor positive (RF+) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patient cohort. Methods: Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug-naïve RF+ patients (n = 223; mean duration of symptoms, 6 months) were categorised as ACR none/20/50/70 responders. One-way analysis of variance and two-sample t tests were used to investigate the relationship between the ACR response groups and each composite measure. EULAR reached/change cut-point scores were calculated for each composite measure. EULAR (good/moderate/none) responses for each composite measure and the degree of agreement with the DAS44/ESR-4 item were calculated for 203 patients. Results: Patients were mostly female (78%) with moderate to high disease activity. A centile-based nomogram compared equivalent composite measure scores. Changes from baseline in the composite measures in patients with ACRnone were significantly less than those of ACR20/50/70 responders, and those for ACR50 were significantly different from those for ACR70. EULAR reached/change cut-point scores for our cohort were similar to published cut-points. When compared with the DAS44/ESR-4 item, EULAR (good/moderate/none) percentage agreements were 92 with the DAS44/ESR-3 item, 74 with the Clinical Disease Activity Index, and 80 with the DAS28/ESR-4 item, the DAS28/CRP-4 item and the Simplified Disease Activity Index. Conclusion: The relationships of nine different RA composite measures against the DAS44/ESR-4 item when applied to a cohort of seropositive patients with early RA are described. Each of these simplified status and response measures could be useful in assessing patients with RA, but the specific measure selected should be pre-specified and described for each study.

Clinical Response Within 12 Weeks as a Predictor of Future Low Disease Activity in Patients with Early RA: Results from the TEAR Trial

OBJECTIVE To investigate the relationship of genetic and biochemical determinants of paraoxonase 1 activity to carotid plaque as a surrogate marker of cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS The relationships between paraoxonase 1 activity, PON1 genotype (for the functional polymorphism at position 192), and carotid plaque presence were determined in 168 RA patients. After an overnight fast, blood was collected for lipoprotein analysis, and paraoxonase 1 activity was measured using paraoxon as the substrate. The PON1 Q192R genotype was determined for all patients. Lipoprotein cholesterol levels, traditional CV risk factors, medication use, and RA disease characteristics were assessed for all patients. RESULTS Paraoxonase 1 activity values in the RA patients were highest for the RR genotype, intermediate for the QR genotype, and lowest for the QQ genotype (P < 0.0001). Compared to patients with either the QQ genotype or the QR genotype, patients with the RR genotype demonstrated decreased risk of carotid plaque on multivariate analysis, controlling for traditional CV risk factors, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels, prednisone use, and cholesterol-lowering medication use (P < 0.05). Additional multivariate logistic regression analysis controlling for the above factors also revealed a significant association of plasma paraoxonase 1 activity with carotid plaque in RA patients. Lower plasma paraoxonase 1 activity was associated with increased risk of carotid plaque (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION The current findings suggest a relationship of the genetic determinants and activity of paraoxonase 1 to CV risk in RA patients, as assessed by the presence or absence of carotid plaque. Further CV outcome studies are warranted to validate the utility of paraoxonase 1 as a biomarker of CV risk in patients with RA.