Search

Calcinosis cutis affects 20-40% of patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). When calcinosis cutis becomes clinically apparent, it is irreversible in most cases. Detection of active calcification formation might allow early disease-modifying interventions. We assessed the feasibility of visualizing active calcifications using [18F]Sodium Fluoride ([18F]NaF) PET/low-dose CT (LDCT) in SSc patients with calcinosis cutis. In this cross-sectional, observational pilot study patients underwent a whole body [18F]NaF PET/LDCT. All patients met the 2013 ACR/EULAR SSc criteria and had clinically detectable calcinosis cutis. (Sub)cutaneous calcifications were described by three investigators. Nine female patients were included (median age 59.0 years [IQR 51.5-70.5]). [18F]NaF uptake was mostly visible in the fingers (n=7) and knees (n=5). [18F]NaF PET showed calcifications in the fingers of 3 patients where calcifications were undetected on LDCT and in the clinic. Ninety-seven percent of [18F]NaF positive lesions was visible on LDCT. Of all lesions visible on LDCT, 70% was also visible on [18F]NaF PET. Imaging of active calcifications in SSc is feasible using [18F]NaF PET/LDCT. Seventy percent of calcifications on LDCT were [18F]NaF PET positive. Although these findings require replication, [18F]NaF PET/LDCT may detect active calcification formation, being potentially suitable for early disease-modifying interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The role of the species Mycobacterium haemophilum as a pathogenic non-tuberculous microorganism is becoming better defined with the use of specific detection methods. However, epidemiological investigations of this species are still scarce. We analysed the genetic diversity of M. haemophilum by amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) typing and compared isolates from different parts of the world. In total, 128 isolates, including 41 from the USA, 51 from Australia, 28 from Europe and eight from Israel were compared using AFLP methodology. Two restriction enzymes ( MseI and EcoRI) and one selective primer were applied and provided a high discriminatory power. Clusters of isolates with identical AFLP patterns, which could indicate a possible common source, were observed from the Netherlands, New York and Australia. No clear clustering on the basis of continental origin was observed; however, types were restricted to geographical areas and not found on other continents. A high genetic stability within the species was demonstrated by the long-term existence of a single type. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Until recently, intravenous cyclophosphamide pulses with oral corticosteroids were regarded standard therapy for proliferative lupus nephritis (LN). Azathioprine, a less toxic alternative, was never proven to be inferior. In the first Dutch lupus nephritis study (enrollment between 1995 and 2001), we randomized 87 proliferative LN patients to either cyclophosphamide pulses (750 mg/m2, 13 pulses in 2 years) combined with oral prednisone (CY) or to azathioprine (2 mg/kg/day in 2 years) combined with intravenous pulses of methylprednisolone (3 × 3 pulses of 1000 mg) and oral prednisone (AZA). After a median follow-up of 5.7 years (interquartile range 4.1–7.2 years), doubling of serum creatinine was more frequent in the AZA group, although not statistically significant (relative risk (RR): 4.1, with 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.8–20.4). Relapses occurred more often in the AZA group (RR: 8.8, 95% CI: 1.5–31.8). Creatinine and proteinuria at last visit did not differ between the two treatment arms. Moreover, 88.4% of the patients in the AZA arm were still free of cyclophosphamide treatment. During the first 2 years, the frequency of remission was not different, but infections, especially herpes zoster virus infections (HZV) were more frequent in the AZA group. Parameters for ovarian function did not differ between the two groups. In conclusion, in this open-label randomized controlled trial, cyclophosphamide was superior to azathioprine with regard to renal relapses and HZV. At last follow-up, there were no differences in serum creatinine or proteinuria between the two groups. However, since our study lacked sufficient power, longer follow-up is needed to reveal putative differences.Kidney International (2006) 70, 732–742. doi:10.1038/sj.ki.5001630; published online 5 July 2006 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]