Search

Objective: To scope the current published evidence on cardiovascular risk factors in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) focusing on the role of autoantibodies and the effect of antirheumatic agents. Methods: Two reviews were conducted in parallel: A targeted literature review (TLR) describing the risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) in RA patients; and a systematic literature review (SLR) identifying and characterizing the association between autoantibody status and CVD risk in RA. A narrative synthesis of the evidence was carried out. Results: A total of 69 publications (49 in the TLR and 20 in the SLR) were included in the qualitative evidence synthesis. The most prevalent topic related to CVD risks in RA was inflammation as a shared mechanism behind both RA morbidity and atherosclerotic processes. Published evidence indicated that most of RA patients already had significant CV pathologies at the time of diagnosis, suggesting subclinical CVD may be developing before patients become symptomatic. Four types of autoantibodies (rheumatoid factor, anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies, anti-phospholipid autoantibodies, anti-lipoprotein autoantibodies) showed increased risk of specific cardiovascular events, such as higher risk of cardiovascular death in rheumatoid factor positive patients and higher risk of thrombosis in anti-phospholipid autoantibody positive patients. Conclusion: Autoantibodies appear to increase CVD risk; however, the magnitude of the increase and the types of CVD outcomes affected are still unclear. Prospective studies with larger populations are required to further understand and quantify the association, including the causal pathway, between specific risk factors and CVD outcomes in RA patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Direct injection of corticosteroids into the joint is a standard treatment for knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, the treatment is somewhat controversial with regard to the benefit of both single and repeated injections; evidence that they are beneficial comes from small studies that show only modest improvements. The aim of this study was to estimate the short- and long-term clinical efficacy and safety of hylan G-F 20 versus intra-articular corticosteroids (IACS) for the treatment of pain in knee OA using Bayesian network meta-analysis. Methods: Based on a pre-specified protocol, MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to June 2018 to identify randomized controlled trials. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials was used to assess the included studies. Hylan G-F 20 and IACS were compared using Bayesian network meta-analysis. Efficacy was evaluated at 1, 3, and 6 months, and at the final follow-up for safety outcomes. A pain hierarchy was used to select 1 pain outcome per study. Results: Forty-two trials were included for analysis. The network meta-analysis of pain showed that hylan G-F 20 may be equivalent to IACS in the short-term, but by 6 months the benefit relative to IACS was statistically significant, standardized mean difference (95% credible interval): –0.13 (–0.26, –0.01). There were no statistical differences in adverse events. Conclusions: Hylan G-F 20 may perform better in relieving pain at 6 months post-injection compared to IACS. Both agents were relatively well tolerated, with no clear differences in safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]