Risk Factors and Clinical Outcomes Associated With Sarcopenia in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Sarcopenia is underrecognized in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Risk factors of sarcopenia and its impact on outcomes in RA patients are relatively unknown. We conducted a systematic review to identify factors and outcomes associated with sarcopenia in RA. We conducted this review according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases by combining the following search concepts: (1) RA and (2) sarcopenia. Articles were included if they included RA patients, assessed for sarcopenia using a consensus working group definition, and assessed for clinical outcomes. Meta-analysis was performed using studies that shared the same sarcopenia definition and consistency in reporting patient or disease variables. Our search identified 3602 articles. After removal of duplicates, title and abstract screen, and full-text review, 16 articles were included for final analysis. All studies had observational study designs. The pooled prevalence of sarcopenia ranged from 24% to 30%, depending on the criteria for sarcopenia used. Factors associated with sarcopenia included higher 28-joint Disease Activity Scale scores (+0.39; 95% confidence interval, +0.02 to +0.77) and baseline methotrexate use (odds ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.97). Baseline glucocorticoid use had a positive correlation with sarcopenia in multiple studies. Several studies found lower bone mineral density and higher incidence of falls and fractures in patients with sarcopenia. Sarcopenia is prevalent in RA, and it may be associated with higher RA disease activity, lower bone mineral density, and increased falls and fractures. Therefore, early screening of sarcopenia in RA patients is important to incorporate into clinical rheumatology practice.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients with rheumatoid arthritis: data from the Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative (OBRI).

Objective: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created challenges for patients with RA. We examined the potential impact of the pandemic on patient-reported outcomes (PROs), disease activity and medication profiles, comparing the periods pre-pandemic and during the pandemic. Methods: Patients enrolled in the Ontario Best Practices Research Initiative were included if they had at least one visit to a physician or study interviewer within 12 months before and after the start of pandemic-related closures in Ontario (15 March 2020). Baseline characteristics, disease activity, PROs [i.e. health assessment questionnaire disability index, RA disease activity index (RADAI), European quality of life five-dimension questionnaire], medication use and changes were included. Student's paired two-sample t-tests and McNamar's tests were performed for continuous and categorical variables between time periods. Results: The sample for analysis consisted of 1508 patients, with a mean (s.d.) age of 62.7 (12.5) years, and 79% were female. Despite decreases in the number of in-person visits during the pandemic, there was no significant negative impact on disease activity or PRO scores. The DASs in both periods remained low, with either no clinically significant differences or slight improvement. Scores for mental, social and physical health were either stable or improved. There were statistically significant decreases in conventional synthetic DMARD use (P < 0.0001) and increased Janus kinase inhibitor usage (P = 0.0002). Biologic DMARD use remained stable throughout the pandemic. Conclusion: In this cohort, disease activity and PROs of RA patients remained stable during the COVID-19 pandemic. The longer-term outcomes of the pandemic warrant investigation.

Evaluation of the Fracture Liaison Service within the Canadian Healthcare Setting.

Previous studies evaluating fracture liaison service (FLS) programs have found them to be cost-effective, efficient, and reduce the risk of fracture. However, few studies have evaluated the clinical effectiveness of these programs. We compared the patient populations of those referred for osteoporosis management by FLS to those referred by primary care physicians (PCP), within the Canadian healthcare system in the province of Ontario. Specifically, we investigated if a referral from FLS is similarly effective as PCP at identifying patients at risk for future osteoporotic fractures and if osteoporosis therapies have been previously initiated. A retrospective chart review of patients assessed by a single Ontario rheumatology practice affiliated with FLS between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2017, was performed identifying two groups: those referred by FLS within Hamilton and those referred by their PCP for osteoporosis management. Fracture risk of each patient was determined using FRAX. A total of 573 patients (n = 225 (FLS group) and n = 227 (PCP group)) were evaluated. Between the FLS and PCP groups, there were no significant differences in the absolute 10-year risk of a major osteoporotic fracture (15.6% (SD = 10.2) vs 15.3% (SD = 10.3)) and 10-year risk of hip fracture (4.7% (SD = 8.3) vs 4.7% (SD = 6.8)), respectively. 10.7% of patients referred by FLS and 40.5% of patients referred by their PCP were on osteoporosis medication prior to fracture. Our study suggests that referral from FLS is similarly effective as PCP at identifying patients at risk for future osteoporotic fractures, and clinically effective at identifying the care gap with the previous use of targeted osteoporosis therapies from referral from PCP being low and much lower in those referred by FLS. Interventional programs such as FLS can help close the treatment gap by providing appropriate care to patients that were not previously identified to be at risk for fracture by their primary care physician and initiate proper medical management.

Differences in cardiovascular health in ambulatory persons with cerebral palsy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare cardiovascular health variables and physical activity levels of adolescents and adults with cerebral palsy who are Gross Motor Func-tion Classification System (GMFCS) levels I and II. METHODS: Eleven adolescents (mean age 13.1 (standard deviation (SD) 2.1) years) and 14 adults (mean age 31.7 (SD 10.4) years)) with cerebral palsy were included, grouped by their GMFCS level (level I (n = 12); level II (n = 13)). Assessments of cardiovascular health, body composition and physical activity levels were performed. Cardiovascular variables included resting blood pressure and carotid artery intima media thickness. Body composition included height, weight, body mass index, and waist circumference. Physical activity was measured using accelerometry. RESULTS: Adjusting for age between GMFCS levels (GMFCS I mean 17.3 (SD 5.2); GMFCS II mean 29.3 (SD 14.1) years, p = 0.011), significant differences were evident for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per day (GMFCS I median 45.8 (interquartile range (IQR) 32.4-75.1); GMFCS II median 16.4 (IQR 13.0, 25.0) min/day, p = 0.011), height (GMFCS I mean 1.63 (SD 0.14); GMFCS II mean 1.56 (SD 0.12) m, p = 0.010), mean arterial pressure (GMFCS I mean 84.6 (SD 7.8); GMFCS II mean 89.4 (SD 8.5) mmHg, p = 0.030), and carotid artery intima media thickness (GMFCS I mean 0.431 (SD 0.06); GMFCS II mean 0.489 (SD 0.04), p = 0.026). CONCLUSION: Individuals with cerebral palsy who were GMFCS level I had lower mean arterial pressure, thinner carotid artery intima media thickness, and engaged in a greater amount of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per day than those who were GMFCS level II. Clinicians should acknowledge that ambulatory individuals with cerebral palsy could have differing cardiovascular health profiles and should monitor these cardiovascular variables and discuss physical activity during healthcare visits, regardless of age.

Occurrence of Serious Infection in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Biologics and Denosumab Observed in a Clinical Setting.

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies combining biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) to treat rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have shown an increased risk of infection. However, the risk of infection with concurrent use of denosumab, a biologic agent for the treatment of osteoporosis, and a bDMARD remains unclear. Here, we evaluated the incidence of serious and opportunistic infections in patients treated concurrently with denosumab and a bDMARD and patients treated with a bDMARD alone. METHODS: A chart review of patients with RA from 2 Canadian rheumatology practices between July 1, 2010, and July 31, 2014, identified 2 groups of patients: those taking denosumab and a bDMARD concurrently (concurrent group) and those taking only a bDMARD (biologic-alone group). Patients were followed from the time of initiation of denosumab, or a matched index date for the biologic-alone group, to the end of the study or loss to followup. Instances of serious or opportunistic infections were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 308 patients (n = 102 for the concurrent group and n = 206 for the biologic-alone group) were evaluated. Within the concurrent group, 3 serious infection events occurred. Within the biologic-alone group, 4 serious infection events and 1 opportunistic infection event occurred. In both groups, all patients with serious or opportunistic infection recovered, and there were no instances of death during the study period. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated a low occurrence of serious and opportunistic infections in patients with RA taking bDMARD, including patients with concurrent denosumab use.

The Effects of Noncompliance to Prolia (Denosumab) on the Changes in Bone Mineral Density: A Retrospective Review.

Although denosumab (Prolia) has been shown to be a safe and efficacious therapy for osteoporotic patients in numerous clinical trials, few studies have determined its effectiveness in real world clinical practice. A retrospective review of patients prescribed Prolia assessing the impact that noncompliance from the regular dosing regimen of six months for denosumab has on bone mineral density (BMD) was performed. 924 patient records were reviewed between August 2012 and September 2013 with 436 patients meeting the eligibility criteria. Patients were divided into three groups: subsequent injection of denosumab (1) less than five months, (2) between five and seven months, and (3) more than seven months after their initial subcutaneous injection. A multivariable regression analysis was conducted comparing the differences among the three prespecified groups in BMD change (g/cm(2)) after one year of denosumab therapy at both the lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN). The differences in LS and FN BMD have shown that the relationship between the timing of drug administration in these three groups and change in BMD over 1 year was not clinically or statistically significant (p > 0.05). A follow-up study with a larger sample size and longer follow-up duration is required to further characterize this relationship.

The relationship between long-term proton pump inhibitor therapy and skeletal frailty.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are a commonly prescribed class of medications. Their use has been associated with an increased rate of fractures, most notably hip fractures. However, there does not seem to be a clear association between PPI use and bone mineral density measurements, assessed by dual X-ray absorptiometry. The mechanism by which PPI use increases the risk of fractures remains unclear. This review will summarize the current evidence on this topic.