Concordance and agreement between different activity scores in polymyalgia rheumatica.

OBJECTIVE: The C reactive protein polymyalgia rheumatica activity score (CRP-PMR-AS) is a composite index that includes CRP levels and was developed specifically for PMR. As treatments such as interleukin-6 antagonists can normalise CRP levels, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) of PMR-AS, the clinical (clin)-PMR-AS and the imputed-CRP (imp-CRP)-PMR-AS have been developed to avoid such bias. Our primary objective was to measure the correlation of these activity scores. Our secondary objective was to evaluate the concordance between different cutoffs of the PMR-ASs. METHOD: Data from the Safety and Efficacy of tocilizumab versus Placebo in Polymyalgia rHeumatica With glucocORticoid dEpendence (SEMAPHORE) trial, a superiority randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial, were subjected to post hoc analysis to compare the efficacy of tocilizumab versus placebo in patients with active PMR. The CRP-PMR-AS, ESR-PMR-AS, clin-PMR-AS and imp-CRP-PMR-AS were measured at every visit. The concordance and correlation between these scores were evaluated using kappa correlation coefficients, Bland-Altman correlations, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and scatter plots. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients were included in the SEMAPHORE trial, and 100 were analysed in this study. The correlation between the PMR-ASs was excellent, as the ICC and kappa were >0.85 from week 4 until week 24 (CRP-PMR-AS ≤10 or >10). Bland-Altman plots revealed that the differences between the CRP-PMR-AS and the other threescores were low. The cut-off values for the clin-PMR-AS were similar to those for the CRP-PMR-AS 86% of the time. CONCLUSION: The correlation between all the PMR-ASs was excellent, reflecting the low weight of CRP. In clinical trials using drugs that have an impact on CRP, the derived activity scores can be used. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTC02908217.

[Management of suicidal crisis: mentalizing as a team]. / Prise en charge de la crise suicidaire : mentaliser en équipe.

The hospital management of patients experiencing a suicidal crisis and suffering from a personality disorder is complex for caregivers. The care model must be adapted and applied by a multidisciplinary team. The emotional charge of these crisis situations makes it difficult for caregivers to maintain their ability to treat mental states with curiosity and without necessarily experiencing them as they appear to them. In other words, it could be difficult to mentalize. For example, an expressed desire to die may be much more complex in reality. Mentalizing abilities are challenged differently depending on our role with the patient. In this article we explore the specifics of interdisciplinary crisis work through the lens of mentalization-based therapy.

La prise en charge hospitalière de patients traversant une crise suicidaire et souffrant d'un trouble de personnalité est complexe pour les soignants. Le modèle de soin doit être adapté et applicable par une équipe pluridisciplinaire. La charge émotionnelle de ces situations de crise rend difficile aux soignants de préserver leur capacité à traiter les états mentaux avec curiosité et sans les vivre nécessairement tels qu'ils leur apparaissent, c'est-à-dire de pouvoir mentaliser. Ainsi, un désir exprimé de mourir peut s'avérer beaucoup plus complexe en réalité. Les capacités de mentalisation sont mises à mal différemment selon notre rôle auprès du patient. Nous explorons dans cet article les spécificités du travail interdisciplinaire de crise au travers du prisme de la thérapie basée sur la mentalisation.

Abatacept in early polymyalgia rheumatica (ALORS): a proof-of-concept, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial.

BACKGROUND: Medium-dose glucocorticoids can improve symptoms in nearly all patients with polymyalgia rheumatica. According to its good safety profile, abatacept could be used instead of glucocorticoids in early polymyalgia rheumatica. We aimed to determine whether the efficacy of abatacept is sufficient to justify larger studies in early polymyalgia rheumatica. METHODS: To evaluate whether abatacept allows low disease activity without glucocorticoids in early polymyalgia rheumatica, we conducted a proof-of-concept, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. Participants were recruited from five centres in France (in Brest, Le Mans, Morlaix, Dinan and Saint Malo, and Strasbourg) and were included if they had recent-onset (<6 months) polymyalgia rheumatica with a C-reactive protein (CRP) polymyalgia rheumatica activity score (PMR-AS) of more than 17 without any signs or symptoms of giant cell arteritis (clinical and [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose PET-CT evaluation). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive weekly subcutaneous abatacept (125 mg) or matching placebo, with glucocorticoid rescue therapy allowed in cases of high disease activity, for 12 weeks, and then glucocorticoid treatment based on disease activity, until week 36. Investigators, patients, outcome assessors, and sponsor personnel were masked to group assignments. The primary endpoint was low disease activity (CRP PMR-AS ≤10) at week 12 without glucocorticoids and without rescue treatment. The study was powered to demonstrate a 60% difference in response rates between groups. Open-ended adverse events were collected at each visit by clinicians and were categorised following system organ class classification after study completion. The ALORS trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03632187. FINDINGS: 34 patients (22 women and 12 men) were randomly assigned between Dec 13, 2018, and Oct 21, 2021. All patients who had been randomly assigned were included in the analysis. The primary endpoint was reached by eight (50%) of 16 patients in the abatacept group and four (22%) of 18 patients in the placebo group (relative risk 2·2 [0·9-5·5]); crude p=0·15; adjusted p=0·070). Eight (50%) patients in the abatacept and 15 (83%) in the placebo group had adverse events. Four patients (one [6%] in the abatacept group and three [17%] in the placebo group) had serious adverse events. There were no deaths or new safety concerns. INTERPRETATION: This study suggests that the effect of abatacept alone is not strong enough to justify larger studies in early polymyalgia rheumatica. This is only a first step in deciding whether a larger study should be conducted in early polymyalgia rheumatica and does not exclude a potential effect of abatacept in glucocorticoid-dependent polymyalgia rheumatica. FUNDING: BMS Pharma France.

Enoxaparin versus Placebo to Prevent Symptomatic Venous Thromboembolism in Hospitalized Older Adult Medical Patients.

BACKGROUND: Admission to the hospital is a major risk factor for the development of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Whether thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin prevents symptomatic VTE in medically ill, hospitalized older adults remains debated. METHODS: In a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter trial, older adults (>70 years of age) hospitalized for acute medical conditions were randomly assigned to receive 40 mg a day of low-molecular-weight heparin (enoxaparin) or placebo for 6 to 14 days. The primary efficacy outcome was the cumulative incidence of symptomatic VTE (distal or proximal deep vein thrombosis, fatal or nonfatal pulmonary embolism) at 30 days. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included efficacy and safety outcomes at 90 days. RESULTS: The trial was prematurely discontinued in September 2020, 5 years after enrollment began, because of drug supply issues. By the time of trial discontinuation, 2559 patients had been randomly assigned at 47 centers. Median age was 82 years and 60% of patients were female. In the intention-to-treat population, the primary efficacy outcome occurred in 22 out of 1278 (cumulative incidence, 1.8%) patients in the enoxaparin group and in 27 out of 1263 (cumulative incidence, 2.2%) patients in the placebo group (cumulative incidence difference, −0.4 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, −1.5 to 0.7), with no significant difference in time to VTE (P=0.46). The incidence of major bleeding was 0.9% in the enoxaparin group and 1.0% in the placebo group. At 90 days there were 14 symptomatic pulmonary emboli in the enoxaparin group and 25 in the placebo group; all 39 pulmonary embolism events resulted in hospital readmission and/or death, with 5 deaths from pulmonary embolism in the enoxaparin group and 11 deaths in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: This trial of thromboprophylaxis in medically ill, hospitalized older adults did not demonstrate that enoxaparin reduced the risk of symptomatic VTE after 1 month. Because the trial was prematurely discontinued, larger trials are needed to definitively address this question. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique, grant number PHRC-N-13-0283; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02379806.)

Effect of Tocilizumab on Disease Activity in Patients With Active Polymyalgia Rheumatica Receiving Glucocorticoid Therapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Few treatments are available for patients with glucocorticoid-dependent polymyalgia rheumatica. IL-6 antagonists may reduce disease activity in patients with active glucocorticoid-dependent polymyalgia rheumatica. Objective: To compare the efficacy of tocilizumab vs placebo in patients with glucocorticoid-dependent polymyalgia rheumatica. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial enrolled 101 patients with polymyalgia rheumatica at 17 hospitals in France from February 2017 to October 2019. Final follow-up occurred in November 2020. Inclusion criteria were persistent disease activity (polymyalgia rheumatica activity score computed using the C-reactive protein level [CRP PMR-AS] >10) and prednisone dose greater than or equal to 10 mg per day. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous tocilizumab (8 mg/kg; n = 51) or placebo (n = 50) every 4 weeks for 24 weeks, combined with predefined standardized tapering of oral prednisone. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy end point was CRP PMR-AS less than 10 (range, 0-100; higher values indicate greater activity; no minimal clinically important difference defined) combined with either prednisone dose less than or equal to 5 mg per day or a decrease in prednisone dose greater than or equal to 10 mg from baseline at week 24. There were 11 secondary outcomes assessed at week 24 included in this report, including disease activity (measured by CRP PMR-AS) and the proportion of patients no longer taking prednisone. Results: Of the 101 randomized patients (mean age, 67.2 years; 68 [67.3%] women), 100 (99%) received at least 1 infusion and 100 completed the trial. The primary end point was achieved in 67.3% of patients in the tocilizumab group and 31.4% of patients in the placebo group (adjusted difference, 36.0% [95% CI, 19.4%-52.6%]; adjusted relative risk, 2.3 [95% CI, 1.5-3.6]; P < .001). Of 11 reported secondary end points at 24 weeks, 7 showed significant differences favoring tocilizumab, including mean CRP PMR-AS score (7.5 [95% CI, 5.4-9.6] vs 14.9 [95% CI, 11.4-18.4]; adjusted difference, -7.5 [95% CI, -11.2 to -3.8]; P < .001) and the percentage of patients no longer receiving prednisone (49.0% vs 19.6%; adjusted difference, 29.3% [95% CI, 18.9%-39.7%]; adjusted relative risk, 2.5 [95% CI, 1.8-3.5]; P < .001). The most frequent adverse events were infections, experienced by 23 patients (46.9%) in the tocilizumab group and 20 (39.2%) in the placebo group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with active polymyalgia rheumatica despite prednisone therapy, tocilizumab, compared with placebo, resulted in a significantly greater percentage of patients with a CRP PMR-AS less than 10 with reduced prednisone requirements at week 24. Further research is needed to confirm efficacy and to determine the balance of potential benefits and harms. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02908217.

[When the discontinuation of psychotropic drugs is necessary: clinical manifestations and therapeutic approach]. / Quand la discontinuation des psychotropes s'impose : manifestations cliniques et approche thérapeutique.

The reduction or suspension of psychotropic treatment may be necessary for various medical reasons. This can have serious consequences for patients, including clinical manifestations, both physical and psychological. These manifestations, which are often unpleasant, can compromise care during hospitalization and undermine the therapeutic alliance. Their early detection, readjustment of treatment, when necessary, as well as regular communication with the patient and among specialists are important tips to take into account from caregivers.

La diminution ou mise en suspens d'un traitement psychotrope peut être imposée par des raisons médicales diverses. Cela peut avoir d'importantes conséquences pour les patients, notamment des manifestations cliniques, tant physiques que psychologiques. Elles sont souvent désagréables, peuvent compromettre l'adhésion aux soins lors d'une hospitalisation et mettre à mal le lien thérapeutique. Leur détection précoce, le réajustement du traitement quand nécessaire, ainsi que la communication régulière avec le patient et entre spécialistes sont des éléments importants à prendre en compte lors de ces prises en charge.

Outcome of early monoarthritis: a followup study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical, laboratory, and radiological features and outcomes in patients with monoarthritis (MA), identified in a cohort of patients with early arthritis. METHODS: A cohort of 270 patients with undiagnosed arthritis of less than 1 year's duration was divided into 3 groups: single episode of MA (MA, n = 27), MA with a history of patient-reported arthritis (MA + past, n = 23), and oligo- or polyarthritis (OA/PA, n = 220). At 6-month intervals, all patients underwent a standardized examination, radiographs, and standard laboratory tests including rheumatoid factors (RF), antiperinuclear factor (APF), antikeratin antibody (AKA), anticyclic citrullinated peptide antibody (anti-CCP), antinuclear antibodies, and HLA-AB-DR typing. After a median followup of 30 months, the diagnosis was evaluated by a hospital-based rheumatologist. RESULTS: Age and sex did not differ across the 3 groups. Knee involvement was more common in the MA group than in the MA + past group (p < 0.03), whereas hand and metatarsophalangeal involvement was less common (p < 0.03 and p < 0.0001, respectively). RF and anti-CCP were less often positive in the MA group than in the MA + past group (p < 0.02 and p < 0.001, respectively) and the OA/PA group (p < 0.02 and p < 0.03). No patient in the MA group received a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). RA was less common and disease modifying antirheumatic drugs were prescribed less often in the MA group than in the other 2 groups (p < 0.0001 for both comparisons). CONCLUSION: The MA group was clearly different from the other groups, with a favorable outcome and no risk of progression to RA.

Value of antibodies to citrulline-containing peptides for diagnosing early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic values of antiperinuclear factor (APF), antikeratin antibody (AKA), and anti-cyclic citrullinated peptides (anti-CCP) to discriminate between patients with and without rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to determine the diagnostic value of anti-CCP used alone or with other tests. METHODS: Two hundred and seventy patients with early arthritis underwent standardized investigations in 1995-1997. The clinical utility of APF, AKA, and anti-CCP in first-visit sera was evaluated using receiver-operating characteristic curves. Combinations of anti-CCP with other laboratory tests were assessed by multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: Anti-CCP, APF, and AKA were not perfectly correlated with one another. Anti-CCP with 53 UI as the cutoff was 47% sensitive and 93% specific, versus 52% and 79%, and 47% and 94%, for APF and AKA, respectively. Multiple logistic regression selected anti-CCP, AKA, IgM-rheumatoid factor (RF) ELISA, and the latex test. CONCLUSION: Rheumatologists can routinely use 2 or 3 tests for diagnosing RA (latex and/or IgM RF ELISA, and either AKA or anti-CCP ELISA) and can add a third or fourth test when the diagnosis remains in doubt.

Value of laboratory tests in early prediction of rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine which laboratory test or tests at presentation best predicted a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) 2 years later. METHODS: Two hundred seventy patients with early arthritis seen in 7 hospitals underwent comprehensive evaluations at 6-month intervals for 2 years, when the diagnosis of RA was assessed by 5 rheumatologists. The sensitivity and specificity of each test at the first visit for discriminating between RA (38%, n = 98) and non-RA patients were determined. Optimal cutoffs for continuous tests were derived from receiver operating characteristic curves. Sensitivity and specificity of test combinations selected by multiple logistic regression were determined. RESULTS: IgM rheumatoid factor (RF) by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, IgG-antikeratin antibody (AKA), and latex test had the strongest associations with RA. These 3 tests formed the most powerful combination for distinguishing RA from non-RA. CONCLUSION: IgM-RF, IgG-AKA, and the latex test are the best laboratory tests for discriminating between patients with and without RA. Combining these tests slightly improves diagnostic value.

Second-line drugs used in recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis in Brittany (France).

OBJECTIVE: The management of recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is not well standardized. We conducted a survey of drugs prescribed to RA patients in Brittany at presentation and during the first 1 to 3 years of follow-up. METHODS: A cohort of 270 patients with recent-onset inflammatory joint disease was recruited between 1995 and 1997. The evaluation at presentation included a medical history, a thorough physical examination, and a standard battery of investigations. Follow-up at 6-month intervals was offered. At the last visit, between June and December 1999, a panel of five rheumatologists established that 98 patients had RA. RESULTS: At presentation, hydroxychloroquine and injectable gold were the most widely used second-line drugs, and only two patients were offered a combination of second-line drugs. At the last visit, the most commonly used drugs were methotrexate, injectable gold, and hydroxychloroquine (23, 23, and 21 patients, respectively); only three patients were on more than one second-line drug and 38 (38/98, 39%) patients were on glucocorticoid therapy. CONCLUSION: Rheumatologists in Brittany prefer monotherapy with hydroxychloroquine or injectable gold as the initial treatment. Later, they rely mainly on methotrexate, injectable gold, and hydroxychloroquine, often in combination with glucocorticoid therapy.