Search

The autoimmune rheumatological diseases rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondyloarthritis (SpA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are treated with conventional immunosuppressive agents and with modern biological immunomodulators. The latter group of medications have brought about a major change in our ability to control RA and SpA, with more modest results for SLE. The biologicals are very specific in their mechanisms of action, targeting one specific cytokine or one particular cellular marker. Because of this, their efficacy can readily be linked to a single immunomodulatory mechanism. This observation has fuelled hopes that the efficacy of these agents can be predicted at the individual level based on the patient's genetic predisposition, immunological profile or disease phenotype. Whilst the biologic therapies have improved the prospects for patients with these diseases very significantly, the hope that they could be targeted to the patient in an individualized manner has not completely born fruit. In this review, I will argue that we are witnessing important progress in this field, and that justified hope exists for true advances in precision medicine in the autoimmune diseases in the coming years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of belimumab, a human immunoglobulin monoclonal antibody against B lymphocyte stimulator, in a subset of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) who were hypocomplementemic (C3 <90 mg/dl and/or C4 <10 mg/dl) and anti–double‐stranded DNA (anti‐dsDNA) positive (≥30 IU/ml) at baseline. Methods: In this phase III, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study (BEL112341; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01484496), patients with moderate to severe SLE (Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment version of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index [SELENA–SLEDAI] score ≥8) were randomized (2:1) to receive weekly subcutaneous (SC) belimumab 200 mg or placebo, plus standard SLE therapy, for 52 weeks. The primary end point was SLE Responder Index 4 (SRI‐4) response rate at week 52. Secondary end points were time to severe flare and reduction in corticosteroid dose (weeks 40–52). Safety was assessed throughout. Results: Of the 836 patients in the intent‐to‐treat (ITT) population, 356 were hypocomplementemic and anti‐dsDNA positive at baseline (108 in the placebo group and 248 in the SC belimumab 200 mg group). Compared with placebo, the belimumab group contained more SRI‐4 responders (47.2% versus 64.6%; P = 0.0014), had a lower incidence of severe flare according to the SELENA‐SLEDAI flare index (31.5% versus 14.1%), and had a greater percentage of patients who reduced corticosteroid dosage by ≥25% to ≤7.5 mg/day during weeks 40–52 (11.4% versus 20.7%; P = 0.0844). Adverse events (AEs) were similar between treatment groups. Conclusion: Our findings indicate that in hypocomplementemic, anti‐dsDNA–positive SLE patients, weekly SC belimumab 200 mg significantly improves SRI‐4 response, decreases severe flare incidence, and reduces corticosteroid use versus placebo; a trend toward greater benefit compared with the overall ITT population was observed. AEs were consistent with the known safety profile of belimumab. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To explore the safety and tolerability of atacicept in combination with rituximab in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving rituximab re-treatment. Methods In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot trial, 2 infusions (1,000 mg per infusion) of intravenous rituximab, given 2 weeks apart, were followed by once-weekly subcutaneous injections of 150 mg atacicept or placebo for 25 weeks. Primary end points were the nature, incidence, and severity of adverse events (AEs). Secondary end points were the effects on peripheral blood B cells, disease activity biomarkers, and American College of Rheumatology 20% (ACR20), 50% (ACR50), and 70% (ACR70) response rates. Results Eighteen patients were randomized to receive atacicept and 9 to receive placebo. AEs occurred in 17 atacicept-treated patients (94.4%) and in all 9 placebo-treated patients (100%). There were no infection-related serious adverse events. Hypersensitivity and injection site reactions were more common, and more patients withdrew due to AEs, in the atacicept group. Median reductions in Ig levels from baseline to week 32 were greater with atacicept (median change in IgG −31.2%, IgM −60.9%, and IgA −56.4%) than with placebo (median change in IgG −4.4%, IgM −15.9%, and IgA −8.2%). Peripheral B cell numbers remained low in all patients after rituximab-mediated B cell depletion, limiting comparison of time to recovery between treatment groups. There were no between-group differences in ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 response rates. Conclusion In this exploratory trial, atacicept in combination with rituximab showed no new safety issues. Peripheral B cell counts remained too low to determine whether atacicept delayed B cell re-expansion following rituximab-mediated depletion. Despite clear biologic effects, adding atacicept to rituximab in patients with active RA was not associated with clinical benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To assess the efficacy, safety, and biologic activity of atacicept in tumor necrosis factor antagonist-naive patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in whom the response to methotrexate treatment was inadequate. Methods In this phase II study, patients with active RA (n = 311) were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive placebo, atacicept 150 mg weekly with or without a 4-week loading period (twice-weekly dosing), or open-label adalimumab 40 mg every other week, for 25 weeks. The primary end point was 20% improvement in disease severity according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria, assessed using the C-reactive protein level (ACR20-CRP), at week 26. Secondary end points included additional assessments of efficacy, biologic activity, and safety. Results The proportion of patients meeting the primary end point (ACR20-CRP response) did not differ significantly in the atacicept groups and the placebo group (46% in the placebo group, 45% in the atacicept loading group, and 58% in the atacicept nonloading group). In contrast, an ACR20-CRP response was observed in 71% of patients in the adalimumab group ( P < 0.001 versus placebo). ACR50-CRP response rates were significantly higher in all active-treatment groups compared with placebo, but ACR70-CRP response rates were superior only in the adalimumab group. Atacicept treatment reduced the levels of serum IgG, IgA, and IgM rheumatoid factor and the levels of circulating mature B cells and plasma cells. The effects of treatment were similar with and without loading. Immunoglobulin levels returned toward baseline values during the treatment-free followup period (week 38). The most frequent adverse events associated with atacicept represented common illnesses. No serious infections occurred among patients treated with atacicept. Conclusion The primary end point (ACR20-CRP response) was not met despite significant biologic effects of atacicept that were consistent with its proposed mechanism of action. Modest effects of atacicept were seen for some secondary efficacy end points. Treatment with atacicept raised no new safety concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chatzidionysiou K, van Vollenhoven RF (Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden). When to initiate and discontinue biologic treatments for rheumatoid arthritis (Review). J Intern Med 2011; : 614-625. The introduction of biologic therapies heralded a new era in the treatment for chronic inflammatory autoimmune diseases of which rheumatoid arthritis is one of the most prevalent. From a scientific point of view, these therapies demonstrated that the targeting of individual cytokines or cell-surface markers is a very effective approach. For the physician, the appropriate selection of patients in whom these therapies should be initiated is critical, as is the even more contentious issue of whether these therapies can or should be discontinued in selected patients with excellent clinical responses. Whereas the former issue has been addressed in a large number of clinical trials and observational studies, the latter remains poorly investigated and is currently the subject of further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) hybrid (a modified mean percent response to treatment) was officially recommended by the ACR as a revision to 20%, 50%, and 70% response criteria (ACR20/50/70) scores, but has not been tested in clinical trials. We performed a post hoc analysis of a phase III study of certolizumab pegol (Rheumatoid Arthritis Prevention of Structural Damage 1 [RAPID 1]) using the ACR hybrid. Methods Patients with active rheumatoid arthritis were randomized to certolizumab pegol (200 mg or 400 mg every other week) plus methotrexate or placebo plus methotrexate. ACR hybrid scores were compared with ACR20/50/70 outcomes. Results Differences between active treatment and placebo were significant throughout the study using the ACR20 and ACR hybrid outcomes. In the certolizumab pegol 200 mg group, the median ACR hybrid score at week 52 (last observation carried forward) was 49.99. A total of 258 (65.8%) of 392 and 172 (43.9%) of 392 patients had ACR20 and ACR50 responses, respectively. An additional 55 patients (14.0%) and 59 patients (15.1%) had mean improvements in ACR core measures of ≥20% and ≥50%, respectively, and therefore had positive ACR hybrid scores, despite lacking ACR20 and ACR50 responses, respectively. In the placebo group, median ACR hybrid scores were <10 at most time points; unlike other measures, the ACR hybrid measure indicated worsening scores for many patients. Conclusion ACR hybrid analysis had greater sensitivity than traditional ACR20/50/70 criteria, demonstrating improvements in ACR20 nonresponders treated with certolizumab pegol. Negligible benefit was observed with placebo using ACR hybrid analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 2 dosage regimens of lyophilized certolizumab pegol (a novel PEGylated anti-tumor necrosis factor agent) as adjunctive therapy to methotrexate (MTX) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with an inadequate response to MTX therapy alone. METHODS: In this 52-week, phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, 982 patients were randomized 2:2:1 to receive treatment with subcutaneous certolizumab pegol at an initial dosage of 400 mg given at weeks 0, 2, and 4, with a subsequent dosage of 200 mg or 400 mg given every 2 weeks, plus MTX, or placebo plus MTX. Co-primary end points were the response rate at week 24 according to the American College of Rheumatology 20% criteria for improvement (ACR20) and the mean change from baseline in the modified total Sharp score at week 52. RESULTS: At week 24, ACR20 response rates using nonresponder imputation for the certolizumab pegol 200-mg and 400-mg groups were 58.8% and 60.8%, respectively, as compared with 13.6% for the placebo group. Differences in ACR20 response rates versus placebo were significant at week 1 and were sustained to week 52 (P < 0.001). At week 52, mean radiographic progression from baseline was reduced in patients treated with certolizumab pegol 200 mg (0.4 Sharp units) or 400 mg (0.2 Sharp units) as compared with that in placebo-treated patients (2.8 Sharp units) (P < 0.001 by rank analysis). Improvements in all ACR core set of disease activity measures, including physical function, were observed by week 1 with both certolizumab pegol dosage regimens. Most adverse events were mild or moderate. CONCLUSION: Treatment with certolizumab pegol 200 or 400 mg plus MTX resulted in a rapid and sustained reduction in RA signs and symptoms, inhibited the progression of structural joint damage, and improved physical function as compared with placebo plus MTX treatment in RA patients with an incomplete response to MTX. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To develop a measure of renal activity in systemic lupus erythematosus and use it to develop a renal response index. METHODS: Abstracted data from the medical records of 215 patients with lupus nephritis were sent to 8 nephrologists and 29 rheumatologists for rating. Seven nephrologists and 22 rheumatologists completed the ratings. Each physician rated each patient visit with respect to renal disease activity (none, mild, moderate, or severe). Using the most commonly selected rating for each patient as the gold standard, stepwise regression modeling was performed to identify the variables most related to renal disease activity, and these variables were then used to create an activity score. This activity score could then be applied to 2 consecutive visits to define a renal response index. RESULTS: The renal activity score was computed as follows: proteinuria 0.5-1 gm/day (3 points), proteinuria >1-3 gm/day (5 points), proteinuria >3 gm/day (11 points), urine red blood cell count >10/high-power field (3 points), and urine white blood cell count >10/high-power field (1 point). The chance-adjusted agreement between the renal response index derived from the activity score applied to the paired visits and the plurality physician response rating was 0.69 (95% confidence interval 0.59-0.79). CONCLUSION: Ratings derived from this index for rating of renal response showed reasonable agreement with physician ratings in a pilot study. The index will require further refinement, testing, and validation. A data-driven approach to create renal activity and renal response indices will be useful in both clinical care and research settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To assess the degree to which physicians agree with each other and with ratings obtained with 3 existing responder indices, in rating the response to treatment of lupus nephritis. METHODS: Lupus nephritis patient medical records from 125 pairs of visits (6 months apart) were used to create renal response scenarios. Seven nephrologists and 22 rheumatologists rated each scenario as demonstrating complete response, partial response, same, or worsening. The plurality (most frequent) rating of renal response by the physicians was compared with the calculated score from the renal component of the British Isles Lupus Assessment Group (BILAG) index (original and updated [2004] version) and of the Responder Index for Lupus Erythematosus (RIFLE). The degree of agreement among the physicians was assessed by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). The degree of agreement between the plurality physician rating and ratings obtained with the established response indices was assessed using the kappa statistic. RESULTS: The ICC among all physicians was 0.64 (0.62 for nephrologists and 0.67 for rheumatologists). The chance-adjusted measure of agreement (kappa coefficient) between the plurality physician rating and the calculated score obtained using established indexes was 0.50 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.38-0.61) for the RIFLE, 0.14 (95% CI 0.03-0.25) for the original BILAG, and 0.23 (95% CI 0.21-0.44) for the BILAG 2004. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that rheumatologists as a group and nephrologists as a group have equal agreement in their rating of renal response. There was moderate agreement between plurality physician ratings and ratings obtained using the renal component of the RIFLE. Ratings of response using an index based on the original BILAG did not have good agreement with the plurality physician rating. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article investigates the connection between neuropsychiatric (NP) events and the receptor antibodies of antiribosomal P (anti-P), antiphospholipid (lupus anticoagulant [LAC], anticardiolipin), anti-beta2-glycoprotein I and anti-NR2 glutamate in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). According to the authors, SLE-related NP events have been found to be associated with anti-P antibodies and LAC. They claim that it implies that there are different autoimmune pathogenetic mechanisms.

OBJECTIVE: The Sa autoantigen can be found in inflamed synovium of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and at least part of the humoral RA-specific anti-Sa response is directed against citrullinated vimentin. This study was undertaken to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, and prognostic value of determination of levels of antibodies against modified citrullinated vimentin (anti-MCV) as compared with antibodies against cyclic citrullinated peptides (anti-CCP) in an inception cohort of patients with early RA. METHODS: Clinical data, radiographs, and measurements of levels of anti-MCV and anti-CCP antibodies were obtained in 273 patients with early RA at baseline, after 3 months, and after 1, 2, 3, and 5 years. Autoantibodies were also analyzed in 100 healthy controls. RESULTS: Of the 273 patients, 193 (70.7%) were anti-MCV positive and 158 (57.9%) were anti-CCP positive at the time of diagnosis, with nearly equal specificities (95% and 96%, respectively). Forty (14.7%) were anti-MCV positive only, and 5 (1.8%) were anti-CCP positive only. Anti-MCV-positive and anti-MCV-negative patients had similar disease activity at baseline, but presence of anti-MCV was predictive of subsequent high disease activity and continued radiographic progression. Changes in anti-MCV level showed stronger correlation with changes in clinical parameters than did changes in anti-CCP level. The subgroup of patients who were anti-MCV positive and anti-CCP negative showed a higher rate of radiographic destruction than did patients who were negative for both anti-MCV and anti-CCP. CONCLUSION: These findings show that when patients with early RA are compared with healthy controls, analysis of anti-MCV yields greater sensitivity and unchanged specificity as compared with analysis of anti-CCP. Anti-MCV also appears to perform better than anti-CCP in identifying poor radiographic prognosis in patients with early RA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety and efficacy of additional courses of rituximab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: An open-label extension analysis of RA patients previously treated with rituximab was conducted. Patients who had participated in any of 3 double-blind trials were eligible for additional courses (2 infusions of 1,000 mg given 2 weeks apart) if they exhibited a swollen joint count and tender joint count of >/=8 with >/=16 weeks elapsing after the previous course. Safety was assessed in patients receiving all or a portion of a rituximab course. Efficacy was assessed 24 weeks after each course, using the American College of Rheumatology 20% criteria for improvement (ACR20), ACR50, ACR70, European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, the disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire, and Short Form 36 scores, stratified according to prior tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor exposure. RESULTS: A total of 1,039 patients received >/=1 course of rituximab. Of these, 570 received 2 courses, 191 received 3 courses, and 40 received 4 courses, for a total of 1,669 patient-years. Irrespective of prior TNF inhibitor exposure, ACR20 responses were comparable at week 24 after course 1 and at week 24 after course 2 (65% versus 72%), as were ACR50 and ACR70 responses. EULAR moderate/good responses were also comparable in course 2 relative to course 1 (88% versus 79%), with EULAR remission occurring in a 2-fold higher proportion of patients after course 2 than after course 1 (13% versus 6%). The most common adverse events, which were mild-to-moderate acute infusion-related events, decreased with each course. The serious infection rate after course 1 (5.1 per 100 patient-years) remained stable through additional courses. The proportion of patients with circulating IgM and IgG levels below the lower limit of normal (LLN) increased with subsequent courses; however, serious infection rates in these patients (5.6 per 100 patient-years in patients with low IgM levels and 4.8 per 100 patient-years in patients with low IgG levels were comparable with those in patients with immunoglobulin levels above the LLN (4.7 per 100 patient-years). Patients with human antichimeric antibody (9.2%) did not exhibit decreasing efficacy or present additional safety concerns. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that patients treated with repeated courses of rituximab have sustained clinical responses with no new adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between disease activity and radiographic progression of joint destruction in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with methotrexate (MTX), those treated with etanercept, and those treated with the combination of MTX plus etanercept. METHODS: Baseline, 12-month, and 24-month data from the Trial of Etanercept and Methotrexate with Radiographic and Patient Outcomes database were analyzed. The dependent variable was the 1-year change in the modified Sharp/van der Heijde score (Sharp score); therefore, 2 interval changes per patient were available. Interval change in the Sharp score was modeled by time (years), treatment, disease activity, and the interaction (disease activity x treatment). Disease activity was reflected by the time-averaged Disease Activity Score (taDAS) and the time-averaged C-reactive protein (taCRP) level, which were calculated per 1-year interval. Generalized mixed linear modeling (GMLM) was used to adjust for within-patient correlation. RESULTS: GMLM confirmed a significant interaction between treatment and the taCRP level and taDAS with respect to the change in Sharp score (P = 0.012 and P = 0.03, respectively). In patients treated with MTX alone, radiographic progression increased with an increasing taCRP level or taDAS, although progression rates were low in patients whose disease was in remission and in those with low-to-moderate disease activity. This relationship was less clear in patients treated with etanercept and was absent in those who received combination therapy. CONCLUSION: Combination therapy with MTX plus etanercept uncouples the classic relationship between disease activity and radiographic progression in patients with RA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of adalimumab plus methotrexate (MTX) versus MTX monotherapy or adalimumab monotherapy in patients with early, aggressive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had not previously received MTX treatment. METHODS: This was a 2-year, multicenter, double-blind, active comparator-controlled study of 799 RA patients with active disease of < 3 years' duration who had never been treated with MTX. Treatments included adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every other week plus oral MTX, adalimumab 40 mg subcutaneously every other week, or weekly oral MTX. Co-primary end points at year 1 were American College of Rheumatology 50% improvement (ACR50) and mean change from baseline in the modified total Sharp score. RESULTS: Combination therapy was superior to both MTX and adalimumab monotherapy in all outcomes measured. At year 1, more patients receiving combination therapy exhibited an ACR50 response (62%) than did patients who received MTX or adalimumab monotherapy (46% and 41%, respectively; both P < 0.001). Similar superiority of combination therapy was seen in ACR20, ACR70, and ACR90 response rates at 1 and 2 years. There was significantly less radiographic progression (P < or = 0.002) among patients in the combination treatment arm at both year 1 and year 2 (1.3 and 1.9 Sharp units, respectively) than in patients in the MTX arm (5.7 and 10.4 Sharp units) or the adalimumab arm (3.0 and 5.5 Sharp units). After 2 years of treatment, 49% of patients receiving combination therapy exhibited disease remission (28-joint Disease Activity Score <2.6), and 49% exhibited a major clinical response (ACR70 response for at least 6 continuous months), rates approximately twice those found among patients receiving either monotherapy. The adverse event profiles were comparable in all 3 groups. CONCLUSION: In this population of patients with early, aggressive RA, combination therapy with adalimumab plus MTX was significantly superior to either MTX alone or adalimumab alone in improving signs and symptoms of disease, inhibiting radiographic progression, and effecting clinical remission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether prasterone administration results in improvement or stabilization of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) disease activity and its symptoms. METHODS: Women with active SLE were treated with prasterone 200 mg/day plus standard SLE treatments or with placebo plus standard SLE treatments for up to 12 months in this randomized, double-blind investigation conducted at 27 centers. Standard SLE treatments included prednisone (/=6 weeks prior to enrollment and remain unchanged during protocol treatment. Responders were patients who experienced no clinical deterioration and had improvement or stabilization over the duration of the study in 2 disease activity measures (the SLE Disease Activity Index [SLEDAI] and the Systemic Lupus Activity Measure) and 2 quality of life measures (patient's global assessment and the Krupp Fatigue Severity Scale). RESULTS: A total of 381 women with SLE were enrolled. Among patients with clinically active disease at baseline (SLEDAI score >2), 86 of 147 in the prasterone group (58.5%) demonstrated improvement or stabilization without clinical deterioration, as compared with 65 of 146 in the placebo group (44.5%) (P = 0.017). Acne and hirsutism were reported in 33% and 16%, respectively, of the prasterone group and in 14% and 2%, respectively, of the placebo group (P < 0.05 for both comparisons). However, most cases of acne and hirsutism were mild and did not require withdrawal from therapy. Myalgias and oral stomatitis were reported less frequently in the prasterone group (22% and 15%, respectively) than in the placebo group (36% and 23%, respectively) (P < 0.05 for both comparisons). Serum levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and C3 complement significantly decreased, while levels of testosterone and, to a lesser extent, estradiol increased in the prasterone group. CONCLUSION: In adult women with active SLE, administration of prasterone at a dosage of 200 mg/day improved or stabilized signs and symptoms of disease and was generally well tolerated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

CD4+ T cells lacking the costimulatory molecule CD28 have been described both in elderly individuals and in chronic inflammatory disorders, one being rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We, in this study, provide a comprehensive characterization of cell surface markers on and function of such CD28nullCD4+ T cells, as well as correlations with clinical parameters. We conclude that of all surface markers associated with these cells, only CD57 and CD11b are expressed on the majority of them. This CD28null population occurred in one-third of patients with RA and was independent of clinical characteristics. The population was persistent and expanded in peripheral blood, but was excluded from the joint in most patients. Functionally, CD28nullCD4+ T cells were potent effector memory cells with regard to their proliferation and cytokine-secretion profiles. This capacity correlated with a hitherto unpublished surface phenotype, the cells being uniformly CCR7– and CD43high. Moreover, a new terminally differentiated CD45RA+CCR7– population of CD4+ T cells was identified. We would like to suggest that in the unbalanced immune system of patients with autoimmune disease and chronic infection an expanded CD28nullCD4+ T-cell population able to secrete high levels of cytokines is likely to contribute to disease manifestations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To make recommendations on how to report disease activity in clinical trials of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) endorsed by the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)., Methods: The project followed the EULAR standardized operating procedures, which use a three-step approach: 1) expert-based definition of relevant research questions (November 2006); 2) systematic literature search (November 2006 to May 2007); and 3) expert consensus on recommendations based on the literature search results (May 2007). In addition, since this is the first joint EULAR/ACR publication on recommendations, an extra step included a meeting with an ACR panel to approve the recommendations elaborated by the expert group (August 2007)., Results: Eleven relevant questions were identified for the literature search. Based on the evidence from the literature, the expert panel recommended that each trial should report the following items: 1) disease activity response and disease activity states; 2) appropriate descriptive statistics of the baseline, the endpoints and change of the single variables included in the core set; 3) baseline disease activity levels (in general); 4) the percentage of patients achieving a low disease activity state and remission; 5) time to onset of the primary outcome; 6) sustainability of the primary outcome; 7) fatigue., Conclusion: These recommendations endorsed by EULAR and ACR will help harmonize the presentations of results from clinical trials. Adherence to these recommendations will provide the readership of clinical trials with more details of important outcomes, while the higher level of homogeneity may facilitate the comparison of outcomes across different trials and pooling of trial results, such as in meta-analyses.

Objective: To determine the short-term outcome of neuropsychiatric (NP) events upon enrollment into an international inception cohort of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)., Methods: The study was performed by the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics. Patients were enrolled within 15 months of SLE diagnosis and NP events were characterized using the American College of Rheumatology case definitions. Decision rules were derived to identify NP events attributable to SLE. Physician outcome scores of NP events and patient-derived mental component summary (MCS) and physical component summary (PCS) scores of the Short Form 36 were recorded., Results: There were 890 patients (88.7% female) with a mean +/- SD age of 33.8 +/- 13.4 years and mean disease duration of 5.3 +/- 4.2 months. Within the enrollment window, 271 (33.5%) of 890 patients had at least 1 NP event encompassing 15 NP syndromes. NP events attributed to SLE varied from 16.5% to 33.9% using alternate attribution models and occurred in 6.0-11.5% of patients. Outcome scores for NP events attributed to SLE were significantly better than for NP events due to non-SLE causes. Higher global disease activity was associated with worse outcomes. MCS scores were lower in patients with NP events, regardless of attribution, and were also lower in patients with diffuse and central NP events. There was a significant association between physician outcome scores and patient MCS scores only for NP events attributed to SLE., Conclusion: In SLE patients, the short-term outcome of NP events is determined by both the characteristics and attribution of the events.

Objective: To examine the accumulation of risk factors over 3 years in a multicenter, international inception cohort of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)., Methods: The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics registry for atherosclerosis comprises 27 centers from 11 countries. An inception cohort of 935 patients with SLE was assembled, according to a standardized protocol, from 2000 to 2006 to study risk factors for atherosclerosis. Both classic and other coronary artery disease (CAD) risk factors were collected at entry and through 3 years of followup. Therapy was documented over the 3 years. The Framingham 10-year risk factor profile was calculated for each patient at year 1 and year 3., Results: A total of 278 patients from the inception cohort were followed for 3 years and constituted the population for this study. At enrollment a substantial number of patients already demonstrated several risk factors for CAD, both classic and other. All risk factors increased from enrollment over the 3 years of followup. Treatment of hypertension and hypercholesterolemia also increased over 3 years, but less so for hypercholesterolemia. The Framingham 10-year CAD risk profile was higher in men than in women both at entry and at 3 years, and remained unchanged over the 3 years. Corticosteroid use increased only slightly over 3 years, but use of antimalarials and immunosuppressive agents increased to a greater extent., Conclusion: Patients with SLE should be monitored for CAD risk factors from the time of diagnosis and appropriate treatment should be instituted early.

Objective: To describe the prevalence, characteristics, attribution, and clinical significance of neuropsychiatric (NP) events in an international inception cohort of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients., Methods: The study was conducted by the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC). Patients were enrolled within 15 months of fulfilling the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) SLE classification criteria. All NP events within a predefined enrollment window were identified using the ACR case definitions of 19 NP syndromes. Decision rules were derived to determine the proportion of NP disease attributable to SLE. Clinical significance was determined using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey and the SLICC/ACR Damage Index (SDI)., Results: A total of 572 patients (88% female) were recruited, with a mean +/- SD age of 35 +/- 14 years. The mean +/- SD disease duration was 5.2 +/- 4.2 months. Within the enrollment window, 158 of 572 patients (28%) had at least 1 NP event. In total, there were 242 NP events that encompassed 15 of 19 NP syndromes. The proportion of NP events attributed to SLE varied from 19% to 38% using alternate attribution models and occurred in 6.1-11.7% of patients. Those with NP events, regardless of attribution, had lower scores on the SF-36 and higher SDI scores compared with patients with no NP events., Conclusion: Twenty-eight percent of SLE patients experienced at least 1 NP event around the time of diagnosis of SLE, of which only a minority were attributed to SLE. Regardless of attribution, the occurrence of NP events was associated with reduced quality of life and increased organ damage.

Objective: To determine if dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) is beneficial in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)., Methods: In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial, 28 female patients with mild to moderate SLE were given DHEA 200 mg/day or placebo for 3 months. Outcomes included the SLE Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) score, patient's and physician's overall assessments of disease activity, and concurrent corticosteroid dosages (which were adjusted as clinically indicated)., Results: In the patients who were receiving DHEA, the SLEDAI score, patient's and physician's overall assessment of disease activity, and concurrent prednisone dosage decreased, while in the patients taking placebo, small increases were seen. The difference in patient's assessment between the groups was statistically significant (P = 0.022, adjusted). Lupus flares occurred more frequently in the placebo group (P = 0.053). Mild acne was a frequent side effect of DHEA., Conclusion: DHEA may be useful as a therapeutic agent for the treatment of mild to moderate SLE. Further studies of DHEA in the treatment of SLE are warranted.

Objective: To determine if dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) has clinical benefits in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)., Methods: Ten female patients with mild to moderate SLE and various disease manifestations were given DHEA (200 mg/day orally) for 3-6 months. The patients were given other medications as clinically indicated, and followed with respect to overall disease activity and specific outcome parameters., Results: After 3-6 months of DHEA treatment, indices for overall SLE activity including the SLEDAI (SLE Disease Activity Index) score and physician's overall assessment were improved, and corticosteroid requirements were decreased. Of 3 patients with significant proteinuria, 2 showed marked and 1 modest reductions in protein excretion. DHEA was well tolerated, the only frequently noted side effect being mild acneiform dermatitis., Conclusion: DHEA shows promise as a new therapeutic agent for the treatment of mild to moderate SLE. Further studies of DHEA in the treatment of SLE are warranted.