Scleroderma-like syndrome in a woman with silicone breast implants - case report and critical review of the literature.

Various silicon compounds have been reported to stimulate autoimmune reactions in the human body. Based on case reports, a possible causal association between silicone breast implants and systemic sclerosis has been suggested since the end of the 1970s. Although the relationship between systemic sclerosis and silicone breast implants has been intensely investigated, no clear evidence of such an association has ever been found in epidemiological studies. Instead, it is now proposed that silicone breast implants can induce nonspecific symptoms of inflammatory diseases, despite not fulfilling the diagnostic criteria for a specific autoimmune disease. This phenomenon was named autoimmune syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA syndrome). ASIA syndrome is worth considering in the differential diagnosis in rheumatology patients. In this paper, we present a case of the scleroderma-like syndrome in a 48-year-old woman with a broken silicone breast implant and a review the current literature on this issue.

EULAR definition of erosive disease in light of the 2010 ACR/EULAR rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria.

The aim of this report was to propose a definition for erosive disease in the context of inflammatory arthritis in light of the 2010 American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) rheumatoid arthritis (RA) criteria for use in clinical practice and studies. A EULAR task force was formed including 16 rheumatologists and one rheumatology fellow. The process was both evidence based and consensus based, and included, between March 2010 and April 2012, analyses of data from two cohorts, two face-to-face meetings, one online voting and one teleconference. The Leiden Early Arthritis Cohort and the French ESPOIR cohort were used for the evidence-based part. The outcome measures, which were initiation of methotrexate therapy, or any disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy within the first year of disease and arthritis persistency over 5 years, were studied with the aim to give the best definition of erosive disease. A decision was made to select a definition with a high specificity and focus on patients who did not otherwise fulfil the 2010 ACR/EULAR RA criteria (<6 points). By a unanimous vote the following definition was selected: erosive disease for use in the 2010 ACR/EULAR RA classification criteria is defined when an erosion (defined as a cortical break) is seen in at least three separate joints at any of the following sites: the proximal interphalangeal, the metacarpophalangeal, the wrist (counted as one joint) and the metatarsophalangeal joints on radiographs of both hands and feet. A highly specific definition for erosive disease has thus been formulated.

Comparison of recommendations for the use of anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy in ankylosing spondylitis in 23 countries worldwide.

OBJECTIVE: To give an overview of the recommendations for the use of anti-TNF-α therapy in AS in 23 countries worldwide. METHODS: The recommendations were collected, translated and a summary was checked by Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) members from the respective countries. The recommendations were compared with the ASAS recommendations (2006) on three aspects: patient selection for initiation of treatment (diagnosis, disease activity, previous treatment and contraindications), assessment of disease and assessment of response. RESULTS: The majority of the recommendations are similar to the ASAS recommendation with regard to patient selection, assessment of disease and treatment response. Additional objective assessments of disease activity are required in eight countries, leading to a more strict indication to start anti-TNF-α therapy. CONCLUSION; Most national recommendations follow the international ASAS recommendations, suggesting that the latter are widely implemented. This might contribute to comparable access with anti-TNF-α treatment across countries. This article shows that general consensus exists about the use of anti-TNF-α therapy in AS across the world, although some countries require additional objective signs of inflammation and/or more pre-treatment, which limits access.

Treating Rheumatoid Arthritis to Target: multinational recommendations assessment questionnaire.

AIM: To measure the level of agreement and application of 10 international recommendations for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to a target of remission/low disease activity. METHODS: A 10-point Likert scale (1=fully disagree, 10=fully agree) measured the level of agreement with each of 10 recommendations. A 4-point Likert scale (never, not very often, very often, always) assessed the degree to which each recommendation was being applied in current daily practice. If respondents answered 'never' or 'not very often', they were asked whether they would change their practice according to the particular recommendation. RESULTS: A total of 1901 physicians representing 34 countries participated. Both agreement with and application of recommendations was high. With regard to application of recommendations in daily practice, the majority of responses were 'always' and 'very often'. A significant percentage of participants who were currently not applying these recommendations in clinical practice were willing to change their practice according to the recommendations. CONCLUSION: The results of this survey demonstrated great support of 'Treating RA to Target' recommendations among the international rheumatology community. Additional efforts may be needed to encourage application of the recommendations among certain clinicians who are resistant to changing their practice.

2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative.

OBJECTIVE: The 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR; formerly, the American Rheumatism Association) classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been criticized for their lack of sensitivity in early disease. This work was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for RA. METHODS: A joint working group from the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism developed, in 3 phases, a new approach to classifying RA. The work focused on identifying, among patients newly presenting with undifferentiated inflammatory synovitis, factors that best discriminated between those who were and those who were not at high risk for persistent and/or erosive disease--this being the appropriate current paradigm underlying the disease construct "rheumatoid arthritis." RESULTS: In the new criteria set, classification as "definite RA" is based on the confirmed presence of synovitis in at least 1 joint, absence of an alternative diagnosis that better explains the synovitis, and achievement of a total score of 6 or greater (of a possible 10) from the individual scores in 4 domains: number and site of involved joints (score range 0-5), serologic abnormality (score range 0-3), elevated acute-phase response (score range 0-1), and symptom duration (2 levels; range 0-1). CONCLUSION: This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features. This will refocus attention on the important need for earlier diagnosis and institution of effective disease-suppressing therapy to prevent or minimize the occurrence of the undesirable sequelae that currently comprise the paradigm underlying the disease construct "rheumatoid arthritis."

The 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: Phase 2 methodological report.

OBJECTIVE: The American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism have developed new classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The aim of Phase 2 of the development process was to achieve expert consensus on the clinical and laboratory variables that should contribute to the final criteria set. METHODS: Twenty-four expert RA clinicians (12 from Europe and 12 from North America) participated in Phase 2. A consensus-based decision analysis approach was used to identify factors (and their relative weights) that influence the probability of "developing RA," complemented by data from the Phase 1 study. Patient case scenarios were used to identify and reach consensus on factors important in determining the probability of RA development. Decision analytic software was used to derive the relative weights for each of the factors and their categories, using choice-based conjoint analysis. RESULTS: The expert panel agreed that the new classification criteria should be applied to individuals with undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis in whom at least 1 joint is deemed by an expert assessor to be swollen, indicating definite synovitis. In this clinical setting, they identified 4 additional criteria as being important: number of joints involved and site of involvement, serologic abnormality, acute-phase response, and duration of symptoms in the involved joints. These criteria were consistent with those identified in the Phase 1 data-driven approach. CONCLUSION: The consensus-based, decision analysis approach used in Phase 2 complemented the Phase 1 efforts. The 4 criteria and their relative weights form the basis of the final criteria set.

2010 rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative.

OBJECTIVE: The 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR; formerly the American Rheumatism Association) classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been criticised for their lack of sensitivity in early disease. This work was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for RA. METHODS: A joint working group from the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism developed, in three phases, a new approach to classifying RA. The work focused on identifying, among patients newly presenting with undifferentiated inflammatory synovitis, factors that best discriminated between those who were and those who were not at high risk for persistent and/or erosive disease--this being the appropriate current paradigm underlying the disease construct 'RA'. RESULTS: In the new criteria set, classification as 'definite RA' is based on the confirmed presence of synovitis in at least one joint, absence of an alternative diagnosis better explaining the synovitis, and achievement of a total score of 6 or greater (of a possible 10) from the individual scores in four domains: number and site of involved joints (range 0-5), serological abnormality (range 0-3), elevated acute-phase response (range 0-1) and symptom duration (two levels; range 0-1). CONCLUSION: This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features. This will refocus attention on the important need for earlier diagnosis and institution of effective disease-suppressing therapy to prevent or minimise the occurrence of the undesirable sequelae that currently comprise the paradigm underlying the disease construct 'RA'.

[Social and economic aspects of osteoarthritis]. / Spoleczne i ekonomiczne aspekty choroby zwyrodnieniowej stawów.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis. The incidence of the disease increases with age. Demographic forecasts predict aging of the population and an increase in the obesity rate in the society, the factors that contribute to the development of osteoarthritis. Thus, the nearest future will most likely bring an epidemic of the disease. While estimations of direct and indirect costs of OA have been developed in many countries, no such analyses have been made available for Poland. The total cost associated with disability pensions, hiring professional care and general loss of work productivity exceeds the direct cost of diagnostics and treatment. On a country scale, OA and its consequences require significant expenditure on the part of the health care system, social security system and the national budget. Optimization of this cost will require completion of epidemiological and pharmacoeconomic analyses and transformations in the health care and social security systems. The job market will also need to be adapted to the inevitable changes by means of introducing necessary legal adjustments to facilitate continued employment of persons >50 years of age with musculoskeletal disorders.