Comparing the effectiveness of general dietary advice versus a very low energy diet in an obese outpatient population in Australia.

PURPOSE: Obesity is a major public health burden. Outpatient clinics are an essential resource for individuals with obesity to access advice for weight loss management. The aim of this study was to compare anthropometric and weight loss outcomes between participants receiving general dietary (GD) advice, and those on a very low energy diet (VLED) under non-trial conditions. METHODS: Data from 276 adults with obesity attending a multidisciplinary weight management clinic were analysed. Changes in anthropometry, body composition, and blood pressure (BP) over 12 months were analysed using linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Males on the GD demonstrated statistically greater reductions in body weight (BW), BMI, percent fat mass (FM), systolic BP, waist and hip circumference (p < 0.01). Changes in males on a VLED did not reach significance. Females showed statistically significant reductions in BW, BMI, waist and hip circumference regardless of dietary intervention (p < 0.01); those on the GD significantly reduced percent FM (p < 0.001). Females on a VLED had statistically greater reductions in BW, BMI and systolic BP compared to those on the GD. No effect of exercise physiologist was observed in this study. Participants prescribed a GD attended for significantly longer than those on a VLED (p < 0.05), irrespective of gender. At 12 months, 14.3 and 4.5% of males and females on a VLED were still attending, compared to 10.6 and 4.5% on the GD. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study, females in both dietary intervention groups achieved significant changes across multiple measures. Only men receiving GD advice demonstrated significant changes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II-2.

Viral arthritis.

Acute-onset arthritis is a common clinical problem facing both the general clinician and the rheumatologist. A viral aetiology is though to be responsible for approximately 1% of all cases of acute arthritis with a wide range of causal agents recognised. The epidemiology of acute viral arthritis continues to evolve, with some aetiologies, such as rubella, becoming less common due to vaccination, while some vector-borne viruses have become more widespread. A travel history therefore forms an important part of the assessment of patients presenting with an acute arthritis. Worldwide, parvovirus B19, hepatitis B and C, HIV and the alphaviruses are among the most important causes of virally mediated arthritis. Targeted serological testing may be of value in establishing a diagnosis, and clinicians must also be aware that low-titre autoantibodies, such as rheumatoid factor and antinuclear antibody, can occur in the context of acute viral arthritis. A careful consideration of epidemiological, clinical and serological features is therefore required to guide clinicians in making diagnostic and treatment decisions. While most virally mediated arthritides are self-limiting some warrant the initiation of specific antiviral therapy.

Does combined clinical and ultrasound assessment allow selection of individuals with rheumatoid arthritis for sustained reduction of anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether a strategy combining clinical and ultrasound (US) assessment can select individuals with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for sustained dose reduction of anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies. METHODS: As part of a real-world approach, patients with RA receiving anti-TNF therapies were reviewed in a dedicated biologic therapy clinic. Patients not taking oral corticosteroids with both Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) remission (≤2.6) and absent synovitis on power Doppler US (PDUS 0) for >6 months were invited to reduce their anti-TNF therapy dose by one-third. RESULTS: Between January 2012 and February 2014, a total of 70 patients underwent anti-TNF dose reduction. Combined DAS28 and PDUS remission was maintained by 96% of patients at 3 months followup, 63% at 6 months, 37% at 9 months, and 34% at 18 months followup. However, 88% of patients maintained at least low disease activity (LDA) with DAS28 <3.2 and PDUS ≤1 at 6 months. The addition of PDUS identified 8 patients (25% of those that flared) in DAS28 remission, with subclinically active disease. Those who maintained dose reduction were more likely to be rheumatoid factor (RF) negative (46% versus 17%; P = 0.03) and have lower DAS28 scores at biologic therapy initiation (5.58 versus 5.96; P = 0.038). CONCLUSION: Combined clinical and US assessment identifies individuals in remission who may be suitable for anti-TNF dose reduction and enhances safe monitoring for subclinical disease flares. Despite longstanding severe RA, a subset of our cohort sustained prolonged DAS28 and PDUS remission. LDA at biologic therapy initiation and RF status appeared predictive of sustained remission.

Safety of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and/or paracetamol in people receiving methotrexate for inflammatory arthritis: a Cochrane systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature on the safety of using nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) and/or paracetamol in people receiving methotrexate (MTX) for inflammatory arthritis (IA), as an evidence base for generating clinical practice recommendations. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed using the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, and conference proceedings for the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) for 2008-2009. The search aimed to identify studies describing adverse events (AE) with the concurrent use of paracetamol and/or NSAID in people taking MTX for IA. Articles fulfilling our predefined inclusion criteria were systematically reviewed and quality appraised. RESULTS: Seventeen publications out of 8681 identified studies were included in the review, all of which included people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) using various NSAID; there were no identified studies for other forms of IA or with paracetamol. Of the studies examining concurrent use of MTX and NSAID, there were no reported adverse effects on lung, liver, or renal function, and no increase in MTX withdrawal or in major toxic reactions. However, transient thrombocytopenia was demonstrated in 1 study. Looking at specific NSAID, there were no clinically significant AE with concomitant piroxicam or etodolac, and only mild AE with celecoxib or etoricoxib. Antiinflammatory dose aspirin was demonstrated to have an adverse effect on liver and renal function. CONCLUSION: In the management of RA, concurrent use of NSAID with MTX appears to be safe, provided appropriate monitoring is performed. The use of antiinflammatory doses of aspirin should be avoided.

Pain pharmacotherapy in patients with inflammatory arthritis and concurrent cardiovascular or renal disease: a Cochrane systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Pain in inflammatory arthritis (IA) is common and often multifactorial, and many different pharmacotherapeutic agents are routinely used for pain management. There are concerns that some current pain pharmacotherapies may increase the risk of adverse events in patients with concurrent cardiovascular (CV) or renal disease. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed searching Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, DARE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. We also hand-searched conference proceedings for the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism for 2008-2009. RESULTS: Our search identified 4782 studies, of which 190 were included for detailed review, but none met the inclusion criteria for our review. We identified 1 study of etoricoxib and diclofenac in non-IA populations [osteoarthritis (OA) or mixed OA and rheumatoid arthritis]. In that study, the presence of CV disease increased the likelihood of a further CV event 3-fold. Patients with 2 or more CV risk factors showed a 2-fold increased likelihood of adverse CV events. CONCLUSION: Our review has highlighted a lack of specific evidence to guide clinicians in the management of pain in patients with IA and coexistent CV or renal disease. In the absence of this evidence, we suggest clinicians use nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) with caution in patients with preexisting CV disease or ≥ 2 CV risk factors. There is currently no evidence to advise clinicians considering other pain pharmacotherapies in the context of CV comorbidities. Current guidelines regarding the use of NSAID and opioids in moderate to severe renal impairment should also be applied to the IA population.

Protective effect of methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and cardiovascular comorbidity.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is associated with an increased risk of premature mortality, predominantly due to increased cardiovascular disease (CVD). Systemic inflammation has been established as one of the primary drivers of accelerated atherosclerosis in RA, though other traditional and disease-specific risk factors also contribute. There is evidence that methotrexate, considered a mainstay of therapy for RA, can ameliorate some of this excess CVD risk, an effect that has not been seen consistently with other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. The cardioprotective action of methotrexate may occur through reducing systemic inflammation and by directly affecting some of the cellular mechanisms that lead to atherosclerosis. On the basis of this evidence, there are ongoing trials of low-dose methotrexate in patients from the general population with CVD but who do not have RA. Methotrexate reduces the overall CVD burden in patients with RA. With earlier treatment of RA and earlier use of methotrexate it is possible that we may have the capability to radically change patients' long-term CVD risk.

Multinational evidence-based recommendations for pain management by pharmacotherapy in inflammatory arthritis: integrating systematic literature research and expert opinion of a broad panel of rheumatologists in the 3e Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations for pain management by pharmacotherapy in patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA). METHODS: A total of 453 rheumatologists from 17 countries participated in the 2010 3e (Evidence, Expertise, Exchange) Initiative. Using a formal voting process, 89 rheumatologists representing all 17 countries selected 10 clinical questions regarding the use of pain medications in IA. Bibliographic fellows undertook a systematic literature review for each question, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and 2008-09 European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR abstracts. Relevant studies were retrieved for data extraction and quality assessment. Rheumatologists from each country used this evidence to develop a set of national recommendations. Multinational recommendations were then formulated and assessed for agreement and the potential impact on clinical practice. RESULTS: A total of 49,242 references were identified, from which 167 studies were included in the systematic reviews. One clinical question regarding different comorbidities was divided into two separate reviews, resulting in 11 recommendations in total. Oxford levels of evidence were applied to each recommendation. The recommendations related to the efficacy and safety of various analgesic medications, pain measurement scales and pain management in the pre-conception period, pregnancy and lactation. Finally, an algorithm for the pharmacological management of pain in IA was developed. Twenty per cent of rheumatologists reported that the algorithm would change their practice, and 75% felt the algorithm was in accordance with their current practice. CONCLUSIONS: Eleven evidence-based recommendations on the management of pain by pharmacotherapy in IA were developed. They are supported by a large panel of rheumatologists from 17 countries, thus enhancing their utility in clinical practice.

Safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, including aspirin and paracetamol (acetaminophen) in people receiving methotrexate for inflammatory arthritis (rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, other spondyloarthritis).

BACKGROUND: Methotrexate is routinely used in the treatment of inflammatory arthritis. There have been concerns regarding the safety of using concurrent non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including aspirin, or paracetamol (acetaminophen), or both, in these people. OBJECTIVES: To systematically appraise and summarise the scientific evidence on the safety of using NSAIDs, including aspirin, or paracetamol, or both, with methotrexate in inflammatory arthritis; and to identify gaps in the current evidence, assess the implications of those gaps and to make recommendations for future research to address these deficiencies. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, second quarter 2010); MEDLINE (from 1950); EMBASE (from 1980); the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). We also handsearched the conference proceedings for the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) (2008 to 2009) and checked the websites of regulatory agencies for reported adverse events, labels and warnings. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies comparing the safety of methotrexate alone to methotrexate with concurrent NSAIDs, including aspirin, or paracetamol, or both, in people with inflammatory arthritis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed the search results, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. MAIN RESULTS: Seventeen publications out of 8681 identified studies were included in the review, all of which included people with rheumatoid arthritis using various NSAIDs, including aspirin. There were no identified studies for other forms of inflammatory arthritis.For NSAIDs, 13 studies were included that used concurrent NSAIDs, of which nine studies examined unspecified NSAIDs. The mean number of participants was 150.4 (range 19 to 315), mean duration 2182.9 (range 183 to 5490) days, although the study duration was not always clearly defined, and the studies were mainly of low to moderate quality. Two of these studies reported no evidence for increased risk of methotrexate-induced pulmonary disease; one study assessed the effect of concurrent NSAIDs on renal function and found no adverse effect; one study identified no adverse effect on liver function; three studies demonstrated no increase in methotrexate withdrawal; and one study showed no increase in all adverse events, including major toxic reactions. However, transient thrombocytopenia was demonstrated in one study, specifically when NSAIDs were taken on the same week day as methotrexate. This study was a retrospective review that involved small numbers only and was of moderate quality; these finding have not been replicated since.Four studies looked at specific NSAIDs (etodolac, piroxicam, celecoxib and etoricoxib), with a mean number of participants of 25.8 (range 14 to 50) and mean study duration of 16.8 (range 14 to 23) days. These studies were mainly of moderate quality. The studies were primarily pharmacokinetic studies but also reported adverse events as secondary outcomes. There were no clinically significant adverse effects with concomitant piroxicam or etodolac; and only mild adverse events with celecoxib or etoricoxib, such as nausea and vomiting, and headaches.For aspirin, seven studies provided data on adverse events with the use of aspirin and methotrexate. These studies included a mean number of participants of 100 (range 11 to 232), had a mean duration of 1325 (range 8 to 2928) days and were mainly of low to moderate quality. Two of the studies reported no evidence for increased risk of methotrexate-induced pulmonary disease and two studies showed no increase in all adverse events including major toxic reactions; however, none of these studies specified the dose of aspirin that was used. One study demonstrated that concurrent aspirin adversely affected liver function at a mean dose of 6.84 tablets of aspirin per day, which is a possible daily dose of 2.1 g presuming that 300 mg aspirin tablets were given. A further study described a partially reversible decline in renal function with 2 g daily of aspirin. One study reported no increase in adverse events with 975 g aspirin daily, however the study duration was only one week.For paracetamol, no studies were identified for inclusion. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In the management of rheumatoid arthritis, the concurrent use of NSAIDs with methotrexate appears to be safe provided appropriate monitoring is performed. The use of anti-inflammatory doses of aspirin should be avoided.

Pain management for rheumatoid arthritis and cardiovascular or renal comorbidity.

BACKGROUND: Pain in rheumatoid arthritis is common, is often multi-factorial and many different pharmacotherapeutic agents are routinely used for pain management. There are concerns that some of the pain pharmacotherapies currently used may increase the risk of adverse events in people with rheumatoid arthritis and concurrent cardiovascular or renal disease. OBJECTIVES: To systematically assess and collate the scientific evidence on the efficacy and safety of using pain pharmacotherapy in people with rheumatoid arthritis and cardiovascular or renal comorbidities. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 4); MEDLINE, from 1950; EMBASE, from 1980; the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). We also handsearched the conference proceedings for American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) for 2008-09, and checked the websites of regulatory agencies for reported adverse events, labels and warnings. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies comparing the efficacy and safety of pain pharmacotherapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, with and without comorbid cardiovascular or renal conditions.In addition, we also considered controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series, cohort and case control studies and case series (N ≥ 20) to assess safety.For the purpose of our review, pain pharmacotherapy was defined as including simple analgesics (such as paracetamol), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids or opioid-like drugs (such as tramadol), and neuromodulators (including anti-depressants, anti-convulsants, and muscle relaxants). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the search results and planned to extract data and appraise the risk of bias of included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We did not identify any studies meeting our inclusion criteria. Many of the trials of NSAIDs explicitly excluded patients with cardiovascular or renal comorbidities.We did identify one trial that reported evidence in mixed populations (including both rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis) taking either diclofenac or etoricoxib. In this study, the presence of cardiovascular disease increased the likelihood of a further cardiovascular event three-fold. Patients with two or more cardiovascular comorbidities showed a two-fold increased likelihood of adverse cardiovascular events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There were no trials that specifically compared the efficacy and safety of pain pharmacotherapies for patients with rheumatoid arthritis, with and without comorbid cardiovascular or renal conditions.In the absence of specific evidence in rheumatoid arthritis, current guidelines recommend that NSAIDs be used with caution in the general rheumatoid arthritis population while highlighting the added need for extra vigilance in patients with established cardiovascular disease or risk factors for its development. Current guidelines regarding the use of NSAIDs and opioids in moderate to severe renal impairment should also be applied to the rheumatoid arthritis population.Further research is required to guide clinicians when treating pain in rheumatoid arthritis.