2021 American College of Rheumatology Guideline for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis.Methods
We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes (PICO) questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A voting panel comprising clinicians and patients achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.Results
The guideline addresses treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic DMARDs, and targeted synthetic DMARDs, use of glucocorticoids, and use of DMARDs in certain high-risk populations (i.e., those with liver disease, heart failure, lymphoproliferative disorders, previous serious infections, and nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease). The guideline includes 44 recommendations (7 strong and 37 conditional).Conclusion
This clinical practice guideline is intended to serve as a tool to support clinician and patient decision-making. Recommendations are not prescriptive, and individual treatment decisions should be made through a shared decision-making process based on patients' values, goals, preferences, and comorbidities.
SUBMITTER: Fraenkel L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9273041 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveWe aim to describe an evidence synthesis approach using parallel streams of evidence that informed the development of the 2021 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) guideline for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsWe developed the evidence synthesis approach using parallel streams of evidence in multiple rounds of discussion, piloting, feedback, and revisions. A number of working groups involving ACR staff, content experts, and methodologists coordinated to develop and implement the approach.ResultsWe used a major stream of evidence that identified evidence specific to the clinical questions being addressed in the guideline (ie, we were able to match relevant articles to specific questions). We also used additional streams that identified data that applied across multiple questions. We describe in this article the different steps of the major stream, ie, screening and tagging, matching articles to question clusters, matching articles to individual questions, data abstraction and analysis, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADEing). We then describe how we packaged the parallel streams of evidence into standardized structured tables to facilitate formulating the recommendations. These tables included information for the following factors: desirable effects, undesirable effects, certainty of evidence, valuation of outcomes, cost of interventions, and cost-effectiveness of interventions. The approach allowed us to match eligible articles for 47 of 81 clinical questions. We identified no eligible articles that addressed the remaining 34 questions.ConclusionWe were successful in using parallel streams of evidence to inform the development of the 2021 ACR guideline for the management of RA.
| S-EPMC8449038 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 2021 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) guideline considers the specific context of the United States which differs from that of Saudi Arabia in many aspects that may impact recommendations. The objective of this project was to adapt a set of prioritized recommendations from the 2021 ACR guideline for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis RA for the context of Saudi Arabia, by the Saudi Society for Rheumatology (SSR).MethodsThe process followed the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT methodology, and the reporting adhered to the RIGHT-Ad@pt checklist. Working groups included a coordination group and a 19-member panel representing different stakeholder groups. The Evidence to Decision (EtD) tables included evidence on health effects from the source guideline and contextual information from the Saudi setting.ResultsThe panel prioritized and adapted five recommendations from the source guideline. The process led to modifying two out of the five prioritized recommendations, all listed here. In naive patients with low disease activity, methotrexate (MTX) is conditionally recommended over sulfasalazine (SSZ) (modified direction); hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is conditionally recommended over SSZ (unmodified). Initiation of csDMARDs with short-term glucocorticoids is conditionally recommended over csDMARDs alone in naive patients with moderate to high disease activity (modified direction). Switch to subcutaneous MTX is conditionally recommended over addition/switch to alternative DMARD(s) in patients taking oral MTX who are not at target (unmodified). Discontinuation of MTX is conditionally recommended over gradual discontinuation of the bDMARD or tsDMARD for patients taking MTX plus a bDMARD or tsDMARD who wish to discontinue a DMARD (unmodified).ConclusionRheumatologists practicing in Saudi Arabia can use the adoloped recommendations generated by this project while adopting the rest of the recommendations from the 2021 ACR guidelines.
| S-EPMC9682746 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo provide recommendations for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with a focus on nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging, irrespective of JIA phenotype.MethodsWe developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.ResultsRecommendations in this guideline include the use of physical therapy and occupational therapy interventions; a healthy, well-balanced, age-appropriate diet; specific laboratory monitoring for medications; widespread use of immunizations; and shared decision-making with patients/caregivers. Disease management for all patients with JIA is addressed with respect to nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional.ConclusionThis clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis, and a concurrent 2021 guideline on oligoarthritis, temporomandibular arthritis, and systemic JIA. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver.
| S-EPMC10127939 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo provide recommendations for the management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with a focus on nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging, irrespective of JIA phenotype.MethodsWe developed clinically relevant Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low). A Voting Panel including clinicians and patients/caregivers achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.ResultsRecommendations in this guideline include the use of physical therapy and occupational therapy interventions; a healthy, well-balanced, age-appropriate diet; specific laboratory monitoring for medications; widespread use of immunizations; and shared decision-making with patients/caregivers. Disease management for all patients with JIA is addressed with respect to nonpharmacologic therapies, medication monitoring, immunizations, and imaging. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low in quality. For that reason, more than half of the recommendations are conditional.ConclusionThis clinical practice guideline complements the 2019 American College of Rheumatology JIA and uveitis guidelines, which addressed polyarthritis, sacroiliitis, enthesitis, and uveitis, and a concurrent 2021 guideline on oligoarthritis, temporomandibular arthritis, and systemic JIA. It serves as a tool to support clinicians, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. The recommendations take into consideration the severity of both articular and nonarticular manifestations as well as patient quality of life. Although evidence is generally low quality and many recommendations are conditional, the inclusion of caregivers and patients in the decision-making process strengthens the relevance and applicability of the guideline. It is important to remember that these are recommendations. Clinical decisions, as always, should be made by the treating clinician and patient/caregiver.
| S-EPMC10231687 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo develop an evidence-based guideline for the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), as a collaboration between the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF).MethodsWe identified critical outcomes in PsA and clinically relevant PICO (population/intervention/comparator/outcomes) questions. A Literature Review Team performed a systematic literature review to summarize evidence supporting the benefits and harms of available pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies for PsA. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A voting panel, including rheumatologists, dermatologists, other health professionals, and patients, achieved consensus on the direction and the strength of the recommendations.ResultsThe guideline covers the management of active PsA in patients who are treatment-naive and those who continue to have active PsA despite treatment, and addresses the use of oral small molecules, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin-12/23 inhibitors (IL-12/23i), IL-17 inhibitors, CTLA4-Ig (abatacept), and a JAK inhibitor (tofacitinib). We also developed recommendations for psoriatic spondylitis, predominant enthesitis, and treatment in the presence of concomitant inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes, or serious infections. We formulated recommendations for a treat-to-target strategy, vaccinations, and nonpharmacologic therapies. Six percent of the recommendations were strong and 94% conditional, indicating the importance of active discussion between the health care provider and the patient to choose the optimal treatment.ConclusionThe 2018 ACR/NPF PsA guideline serves as a tool for health care providers and patients in the selection of appropriate therapy in common clinical scenarios. Best treatment decisions consider each individual patient situation. The guideline is not meant to be proscriptive and should not be used to limit treatment options for patients with PsA.
| S-EPMC8218333 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo develop an evidence-based guideline for the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), as a collaboration between the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF).MethodsWe identified critical outcomes in PsA and clinically relevant PICO (population/intervention/comparator/outcomes) questions. A Literature Review Team performed a systematic literature review to summarize evidence supporting the benefits and harms of available pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies for PsA. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A voting panel, including rheumatologists, dermatologists, other health professionals, and patients, achieved consensus on the direction and the strength of the recommendations.ResultsThe guideline covers the management of active PsA in patients who are treatment-naive and those who continue to have active PsA despite treatment, and addresses the use of oral small molecules, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin-12/23 inhibitors (IL-12/23i), IL-17 inhibitors, CTLA4-Ig (abatacept), and a JAK inhibitor (tofacitinib). We also developed recommendations for psoriatic spondylitis, predominant enthesitis, and treatment in the presence of concomitant inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes, or serious infections. We formulated recommendations for a treat-to-target strategy, vaccinations, and nonpharmacologic therapies. Six percent of the recommendations were strong and 94% conditional, indicating the importance of active discussion between the health care provider and the patient to choose the optimal treatment.ConclusionThe 2018 ACR/NPF PsA guideline serves as a tool for health care providers and patients in the selection of appropriate therapy in common clinical scenarios. Best treatment decisions consider each individual patient situation. The guideline is not meant to be proscriptive and should not be used to limit treatment options for patients with PsA.
| S-EPMC8265826 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo develop recommendations for the screening, monitoring, and treatment of uveitis in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA).MethodsPediatric rheumatologists, ophthalmologists with expertise in uveitis, patient representatives, and methodologists generated key clinical questions to be addressed by this guideline. This was followed by a systematic literature review and rating of the available evidence according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. A group consensus process was used to compose the final recommendations and grade their strength as conditional or strong.ResultsDue to a lack of literature with good quality of evidence, recommendations were formulated on the basis of available evidence and a consensus expert opinion. Regular ophthalmic screening of children with JIA is recommended because of the risk of uveitis, and the frequency of screening should be based on individual risk factors. Regular ophthalmic monitoring of children with uveitis is recommended, and intervals should be based on ocular examination findings and treatment regimen. Ophthalmic monitoring recommendations were strong primarily because of concerns of vision-threatening complications of uveitis with infrequent monitoring. Topical glucocorticoids should be used as initial treatment to achieve control of inflammation. Methotrexate and the monoclonal antibody tumor necrosis factor inhibitors adalimumab and infliximab are recommended when systemic treatment is needed for the management of uveitis. The timely addition of nonbiologic and biologic drugs is recommended to maintain uveitis control in children who are at continued risk of vision loss.ConclusionThis guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients/parents making decisions on the screening, monitoring, and management of children with JIA and uveitis, using GRADE methodology and informed by a consensus process with input from rheumatology and ophthalmology experts, current literature, and patient/parent preferences and values.
| S-EPMC6884654 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo develop recommendations for the screening, monitoring, and treatment of uveitis in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA).MethodsPediatric rheumatologists, ophthalmologists with expertise in uveitis, patient representatives, and methodologists generated key clinical questions to be addressed by this guideline. This was followed by a systematic literature review and rating of the available evidence according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. A group consensus process was used to compose the final recommendations and grade their strength as conditional or strong.ResultsDue to a lack of literature with good quality of evidence, recommendations were formulated on the basis of available evidence and a consensus expert opinion. Regular ophthalmic screening of children with JIA is recommended because of the risk of uveitis, and the frequency of screening should be based on individual risk factors. Regular ophthalmic monitoring of children with uveitis is recommended, and intervals should be based on ocular examination findings and treatment regimen. Ophthalmic monitoring recommendations were strong primarily because of concerns of vision-threatening complications of uveitis with infrequent monitoring. Topical glucocorticoids should be used as initial treatment to achieve control of inflammation. Methotrexate and the monoclonal antibody tumor necrosis factor inhibitors adalimumab and infliximab are recommended when systemic treatment is needed for the management of uveitis. The timely addition of nonbiologic and biologic drugs is recommended to maintain uveitis control in children who are at continued risk of vision loss.ConclusionThis guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients/parents making decisions on the screening, monitoring, and management of children with JIA and uveitis, using GRADE methodology and informed by a consensus process with input from rheumatology and ophthalmology experts, current literature, and patient/parent preferences and values.
| S-EPMC6788287 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo develop recommendations for the screening, monitoring, and treatment of uveitis in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA).MethodsPediatric rheumatologists, ophthalmologists with expertise in uveitis, patient representatives, and methodologists generated key clinical questions to be addressed by this guideline. This was followed by a systematic literature review and rating of the available evidence according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. A group consensus process was used to compose the final recommendations and grade their strength as conditional or strong.ResultsDue to a lack of literature with good quality of evidence, recommendations were formulated on the basis of available evidence and a consensus expert opinion. Regular ophthalmic screening of children with JIA is recommended because of the risk of uveitis, and the frequency of screening should be based on individual risk factors. Regular ophthalmic monitoring of children with uveitis is recommended, and intervals should be based on ocular examination findings and treatment regimen. Ophthalmic monitoring recommendations were strong primarily because of concerns of vision-threatening complications of uveitis with infrequent monitoring. Topical glucocorticoids should be used as initial treatment to achieve control of inflammation. Methotrexate and the monoclonal antibody tumor necrosis factor inhibitors adalimumab and infliximab are recommended when systemic treatment is needed for the management of uveitis. The timely addition of nonbiologic and biologic drugs is recommended to maintain uveitis control in children who are at continued risk of vision loss.ConclusionThis guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients/parents making decisions on the screening, monitoring, and management of children with JIA and uveitis, using GRADE methodology and informed by a consensus process with input from rheumatology and ophthalmology experts, current literature, and patient/parent preferences and values.
| S-EPMC6777949 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To provide updated American College of Rheumatology (ACR) recommendations on rheumatoid arthritis (RA) disease activity measurements to facilitate a treat-to-target approach in routine clinical care. METHODS:A working group conducted a systematic literature review from the time of the prior ACR recommendations literature search. Properties of disease activity measures were abstracted, and study quality was assessed using the Consensus-Based Standards for the selection of Health Measurement Instruments 4-point scoring method, allowing for overall level of evidence assessment. Measures that fulfilled a minimum standard were identified, and through a modified Delphi process preferred measures were selected for regular use in most clinic settings. RESULTS:The search identified 5,199 articles, of which 110 were included in the review. This search identified 46 RA disease activity measures that contained patient, provider, laboratory, and/or imaging data. Descriptions of the measures, properties, study quality, level of evidence, and feasibility were abstracted and scored. Following a modified Delphi process, 11 measures fulfilled a minimum standard for regular use in most clinic settings, and 5 measures were recommended: the Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints with Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate or C-Reactive Protein Level, Clinical Disease Activity Index, Simplified Disease Activity Index, Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3, and Patient Activity Scale-II. CONCLUSION:We have updated prior ACR recommendations for preferred RA disease activity measures, identifying 11 measures that met a minimum standard for regular use and 5 measures that were preferred for regular use in most clinic settings.
| S-EPMC6884664 | biostudies-literature