Dataset Information

BDMARD Dose Reduction in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Narrative Review with Systematic Literature Search.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Although bDMARDs are effective in the treatment of RA, they are associated with dose-dependent side effects, patient burden, and high costs. Recently, many studies have investigated the possibility of discontinuing or tapering bDMARDs when patients have reached their treatment goal. The aim of this review is to provide a narrative overview of the existing evidence on bDMARD dose reduction and to provide answers to specific dose-reduction-related questions that are of interest to clinicians.

Methods

We systematically searched for relevant studies in four scientific databases. Furthermore, we screened the references of reviews and relevant studies.

Results

Our searches resulted in 45 original studies of bDMARD dose reduction in RA patients (15 RCTs and 30 observational studies). Current evidence shows that bDMARD dose reduction can be considered in all RA patients who achieve stable (e.g., ≥6 months) low disease activity or remission. The best strategies seem to be disease-activity-guided dose optimization and fixed dose reduction, since direct bDMARD discontinuation (without restarting) results in a high flare rate, worse physical functioning, and more joint damage. When tapering the bDMARD treatment of a patient, disease activity should be monitored closely, and if a flare occurs, the dose should be increased to the lowest effective dose. Current evidence shows that restarting bDMARD treatment is effective and safe. Unfortunately, no clear predictors of successful dose reduction have been identified so far.

Conclusion

The current evidence and rising healthcare costs urge that dose reduction should be considered for eligible patients. However, the decision to start dose reduction should be made in shared decision-making. Future research should focus not only on a better understanding of the effects of dose reduction on clinical outcomes but also on the perspectives of patients and physicians as well as the implementation of this new treatment principle.

SUBMITTER: Verhoef LM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5443724 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:There is growing interest in the alterations in body composition (BC) that accompany rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The purpose of this review is to (i) investigate how BC is currently measured in RA patients, (ii) describe alterations in body composition in RA patients and (iii) evaluate the effect on nutrition, physical training, and treatments; that is, corticosteroids and biologic Disease Modifying Anti-Rheumatic Disease (bDMARDs), on BC in RA patients. The primary-source literature for this review was acquired using PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane database searches for articles published up to March 2021. The Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms used were 'Arthritis, Rheumatoid', 'body composition', 'sarcopenia', 'obesity', 'cachexia', 'Absorptiometry, Photon' and 'Electric Impedance'. The titles and abstracts of all articles were reviewed for relevant subjects. Whole-BC measurements were usually performed using dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to quantify lean- and fat-mass parameters. In RA patients, lean mass is lower and adiposity is higher than in healthy controls, both in men and women. The prevalence of abnormal BC conditions such as overfat, sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity is significantly higher in RA patients than in healthy controls; these alterations in BC are observed even at an early stage of the disease. Data on the effect treatments on BC in RA patients are scarce. In the few studies published, (a) creatine supplementation and progressive resistance training induce a slight and temporary increase in lean mass, (b) exposure to corticosteroids induces a gain in fat mass and (c) tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) inhibitors might be associated with a gain in fat mass, while tocilizumab might be associated with a gain in lean mass. The available data clearly demonstrate that alterations in BC occur in RA patients, but data on the effect of treatments, especially bDMARDs, are inconsistent and further studies are needed in this area.

Project description:BackgroundHow best to prioritise COVID-19 vaccination within and between countries has been a public health and an ethical challenge for decision-makers globally. We reviewed epidemiological and economic modelling evidence on population priority groups to minimise COVID-19 mortality, transmission, and morbidity outcomes.MethodsWe searched the National Institute of Health iSearch COVID-19 Portfolio (a database of peer-reviewed and pre-print articles), Econlit, the Centre for Economic Policy Research, and the National Bureau of Economic Research for mathematical modelling studies evaluating the impact of prioritising COVID-19 vaccination to population target groups. The first search was conducted on March 3, 2021, and an updated search on the LMIC literature was conducted from March 3, 2021, to September 24, 2021. We narratively synthesised the main study conclusions on prioritisation and the conditions under which the conclusions changed.ResultsThe initial search identified 1820 studies and 36 studies met the inclusion criteria. The updated search on LMIC literature identified 7 more studies. 43 studies in total were narratively synthesised. 74% of studies described outcomes in high-income countries (single and multi-country). We found that for countries seeking to minimise deaths, prioritising vaccination of senior adults was the optimal strategy and for countries seeking to minimise cases the young were prioritised. There were several exceptions to the main conclusion, notably that reductions in deaths could be increased if groups at high risk of both transmission and death could be further identified. Findings were also sensitive to the level of vaccine coverage.ConclusionThe evidence supports WHO SAGE recommendations on COVID-19 vaccine prioritisation. There is, however, an evidence gap on optimal prioritisation for low- and middle-income countries, studies that included an economic evaluation, and studies that explore prioritisation strategies if the aim is to reduce overall health burden including morbidity.

Project description:IntroductionMisclassification of spondyloarthritis (SpA) as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may lead to delayed SpA diagnosis and suboptimal therapeutic outcomes. Here, we evaluate the literature on clinical manifestations in patients with SpA and RA, particularly seronegative RA, to understand the potential overlap, distinctions, and most reliable approaches to accurate diagnosis.MethodsIn this systematic literature review, conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, we searched key biomedical databases for English-language publications of original research articles (up to July 23, 2020) and rheumatology conference abstracts (January 1, 2018-July 31, 2020) reporting key SpA clinical presentations in patients with SpA or RA. Publications were assessed for eligibility by two independent reviewers; discrepancies were resolved by a third. Studies were evaluated for publication quality using the Downs and Black checklist.ResultsOf 4712 records retrieved, 79 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Of these, 54 included study populations with SpA and RA, and 25 with seropositive and/or seronegative RA. Entheseal abnormalities were more frequently reported among patients with SpA than RA and with seronegative vs. seropositive RA. Psoriasis, nail psoriasis, and dactylitis were exclusively seen in SpA vs. RA. In most publications (70 of 79), advanced imaging techniques allowed for more accurate distinction between SpA and RA. Overlapping clinical characteristics occur in SpA and RA, including inflammation and destruction of joints, pain, diminished functional ability, and increased risk for comorbidities. However, of 54 studies comparing SpA and RA populations, only seven concluded that no distinction can be made based on the SpA manifestations and outcomes examined.ConclusionsTypical SpA-related clinical symptoms and signs were observed in patients with RA, suggesting that misclassification could occur. Availability of advanced imaging modalities may allow for more prompt and comprehensive evaluation of peripheral manifestations in SpA and RA, reducing misclassification and delayed diagnosis.