ABSTRACT
OBJETIVOS: Describir la metodología del Registro Español de Artritis Psoriásica de reciente comienzo de la Sociedad Española de Reumatología (REAPSER), así como sus fortalezas y limitaciones. El objetivo principal del proyecto es identificar factores pronósticos de la evolución clínica y radiográfica en una cohorte de pacientes que padecen artritis psoriásica (APs) diagnosticada con menos de 2 años de evolución. MATERIAL Y MÉTODO: Estudio observacional, prospectivo (2 años de seguimiento; periodicidad anual de las visitas), multicéntrico. La intención en la visita basal fue reflejar la situación del paciente antes de que la evolución de la enfermedad se viese modificada por los tratamientos pautados en los servicios de reumatología. Los pacientes fueron invitados a participar consecutivamente en una de sus visitas habituales al reumatólogo. El tamaño muestral finalmente alcanzado fue de 211 pacientes. Se recogen datos sociodemográficos; de situación laboral; historia familiar; antecedentes personales y comorbilidad; antropométricos; estilo de vida; uso de los servicios de salud; situación clínica al diagnóstico de APs; afectación articular y dolor espinal; dolor y valoración global de la enfermedad; entesitis, dactilitis y uveítis; afectación cutánea y ungueal; situación funcional y calidad de vida; evaluación radiográfica; determinaciones analíticas; tratamiento; brotes en esqueleto axial y periférico. CONCLUSIONES: El estudio REAPSER incluye una cohorte de pacientes con APs de inicio reciente reclutados antes de que la evolución de la enfermedad se viese modificada por la prescripción de FAME en los servicios de reumatología. Se espera que la información exhaustiva recogida en las visitas suponga una amplia fuente de datos para futuros análisis
AIMS: To describe the methodology of REAPSER (Spanish Registry of Recent-onset Psoriatic Arthritis), its strengths and limitations. The aim of this study is to identify prognostic factors for the clinical and radiographic course in a cohort of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) diagnosed within 2 years of symptom evolution. METHODS: Multicenter, observational and prospective study (with 2-year follow-up including annual visits). Baseline visit intended to reflect patient situation before the disease course was modified by treatments prescribed in rheumatology departments. Patients were invited to participate consecutively in one of their routine visits to the rheumatologist. 211 patients were included. Following data were collected: sociodemographic variables; employment situation; family history; personal history and comorbidities; anthropometric data; lifestyle; use of healthcare services; clinical situation at the time of PsA diagnosis; joint involvement and spinal pain; pain and overall assessment; enthesitis, dactylitis and uveitis; skin and nail involvement; functional situation and quality of life; radiographic evaluation; analytical determinations; treatment; axial and peripheral flare-ups. CONCLUSIONS: The REAPSER study includes a cohort of patients with recent-onset PsA, before the disease course was modified by disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs prescribed in rheumatology departments. Exhaustive information collected in each visit is expected to be an important data source for future analysis
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Arthritis, Psoriatic/diagnostic imaging , Disease Progression , Records , Cohort Studies , Follow-Up Studies , Medical History Taking , Patient Selection , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Radiography , Spain , Time FactorsABSTRACT
AIMS: To describe the methodology of REAPSER (Spanish Registry of Recent-onset Psoriatic Arthritis), its strengths and limitations. The aim of this study is to identify prognostic factors for the clinical and radiographic course in a cohort of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) diagnosed within 2years of symptom evolution. METHODS: Multicenter, observational and prospective study (with 2-year follow-up including annual visits). Baseline visit intended to reflect patient situation before the disease course was modified by treatments prescribed in rheumatology departments. Patients were invited to participate consecutively in one of their routine visits to the rheumatologist. 211 patients were included. Following data were collected: sociodemographic variables; employment situation; family history; personal history and comorbidities; anthropometric data; lifestyle; use of healthcare services; clinical situation at the time of PsA diagnosis; joint involvement and spinal pain; pain and overall assessment; enthesitis, dactylitis and uveitis; skin and nail involvement; functional situation and quality of life; radiographic evaluation; analytical determinations; treatment; axial and peripheral flare-ups. CONCLUSIONS: The REAPSER study includes a cohort of patients with recent-onset PsA, before the disease course was modified by disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs prescribed in rheumatology departments. Exhaustive information collected in each visit is expected to be an important data source for future analysis.
Subject(s)
Arthritis, Psoriatic/diagnostic imaging , Disease Progression , Registries , Adult , Cohort Studies , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Medical History Taking , Patient Selection , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Radiography , Spain , Time FactorsABSTRACT
Objetivo: Describir los resultados del estudio comparativo entre las 2 versiones de un inmunoanálisis comercializado para la monitorización terapéutica de adalimumab (ADA) en artritis reumatoide (AR). Material y métodos: Se han analizado 140 muestras de suero de pacientes con AR tratados con ADA 40 mg cada 14 días con las 2 versiones del ensayo (V1 o anterior y V2 o actualizada). Resultados: Se obtuvo una buena correlación con las dos versiones. En general, V2 proporciona resultados más altos de concentración de ADA que V1 y presenta una mayor precisión en el rango de concentraciones próximas al nivel de decisión clínica, ajustándose más a la concentración real del fármaco en sangre. Además, permite la automatización completa, lo cual simplifica mucho el análisis, y reduce significativamente la variabilidad. Conclusión: La monitorización de ADA con la versión actualizada demostró tener ventajas técnicas significativas, pudiendo ser una herramienta más práctica para la toma de decisiones terapéuticas en pacientes con AR (AU)
Objective: To describe the results of the comparative study between both versions of an immunoassay commercialized for therapeutic drug monitoring of adalimumab (ADA) in rheumatoid arthritis (AR). Material and methods: 140 samples of patients with RA treated with ADA 40 mg every 14 days were analyzed by both versions of the test (V1 or previous and V2 or updated). Results: A good correlation was obtained by both versions. In general V2 provides higher results of ADAs concentration than V1 and presents greater precision in the range of concentrations for clinical decisions, adjusting for the real concentration of the drug in blood. In addition, V2 allows for complete automation, which simplifies the analysis and reduces significantly the variability. Conclusion: ADAs monitoring with the updated version demonstrated to have technical significant advantages, constituting a more practical tool for therapeutic decisions in patients with RA (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Drug Monitoring/methods , Immunoassay/methods , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay/methodsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To describe the results of the comparative study between both versions of an immunoassay commercialized for therapeutic drug monitoring of adalimumab (ADA) in rheumatoid arthritis (AR). MATERIAL AND METHODS: 140 samples of patients with RA treated with ADA 40mg every 14 days were analyzed by both versions of the test (V1 or previous and V2 or updated). RESULTS: A good correlation was obtained by both versions. In general V2 provides higher results of ADA's concentration than V1 and presents greater precision in the range of concentrations for clinical decisions, adjusting for the real concentration of the drug in blood. In addition, V2 allows for complete automation, which simplifies the analysis and reduces significantly the variability. CONCLUSION: ADA's monitoring with the updated version demonstrated to have technical significant advantages, constituting a more practical tool for therapeutic decisions in patients with RA.
