Search

This article is a response to comments on a study that investigated the effects of low-dose glucocorticoid therapy on weight and blood pressure in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The authors performed additional analyses and found that glucocorticoid-induced weight gain was limited to the first year and then stabilized. They also addressed concerns about other adverse effects associated with long-term glucocorticoid treatment, noting that recent studies challenge the notion that low-dose glucocorticoids cause cardiovascular events, osteoporosis, or death independent of disease activity. The authors also discussed the divergence in results between their pooled analysis and another trial, and addressed concerns about the handling of missing data. [Extracted from the article]

Glucocorticoids (prednisone) are essential in the treatment of RA and other autoimmune diseases. They are widely used, but treatment guidelines advise against. This viewpoint article explains why and suggests a way forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis exposed to glucocorticoids. Methods: Retrospective analysis of exposure to glucocorticoids in a prospective cohort of 353 patients with rheumatoid arthritis followed from June 2001 up to November 2011 for incident cardiovascular disease in a hospital-based outpatient cohort in the Netherlands. Hazard ratios with 95%-confidence intervals were calculated for the association between different types of exposure to glucocorticoids and incident cardiovascular disease. Associations were adjusted for demographics, cardiovascular risk factors and disease related parameters. Results: Recent and current exposure to glucocorticoids were associated with incident cardiovascular disease, as was a longer duration of exposure and cumulative exposure to glucocorticoids. Adjustment for disease activity and severity negated the association. Conclusion: In observational studies the finding of incident cardiovascular disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis exposed to glucocorticoids is strongly confounded by indication due to high disease activity. The adverse cardiovascular effects of glucocorticoids might be balanced by positive effects working through inflammation control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As such, it is almost certain that those who still required glucocorticoid therapy had more severe disease and that this severity was the deciding factor in determining postoperative (infection) risk, not glucocorticoid exposure. Minimizing glucocorticoid use before surgery in patients with severe rheumatoid arthritis who have been receiving long-term glucocorticoid therapy may be highly deleterious. [Extracted from the article]

Objective. The effects of a 12-week treatment with modified-release prednisone (MR-pred) on the costs of drug treatment of RA were modelled.Methods. With the results of a recent randomized trial as source data, we expressed the effect of treatment (MR-pred vs placebo) on the decrease in the proportion of RA patients meeting disease activity thresholds for reimbursement of biologic treatment.Results. The results showed 11–13% more patients on MR-pred than on placebo dropped below reimbursement thresholds for the Netherlands, Belgium and the UK. Assuming 1 year of biologics cost €15 000 and MR-pred costs €1/day, €396 are saved in each patient delaying biologic treatment by 12 weeks.Conclusion. Despite a considerably higher cost than conventional prednisone, MR-pred is a cost-effective option for RA patients not on glucocorticoids who are eligible for therapy with biologic agents. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Glucocorticoids reduce disease activity and retard progression of joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis, but current recommendations discourage their use because of drug adverse effects. This study examined the effects of low-dose glucocorticoids on weight gain and hypertension, which are among the more worrisome adverse effects for patients and rheumatologists. Visual Abstract. The Effect of Low-Dose Glucocorticoids Over Two Years on Weight and Blood Pressure in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Individual Patient Data From Five Randomized Trials Glucocorticoids reduce disease activity and retard progression of joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis, but current recommendations discourage their use because of drug adverse effects. This study examined the effects of low-dose glucocorticoids on weight gain and hypertension, which are among the more worrisome adverse effects for patients and rheumatologists. Background: Weight gain and hypertension are well known adverse effects of treatment with high-dose glucocorticoids. Objective: To evaluate the effects of 2 years of low-dose glucocorticoid treatment in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Design: Pooled analysis of 5 randomized controlled trials with 2-year interventions allowing concomitant treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Setting: 12 countries in Europe. Patients: Early and established RA. Intervention: Glucocorticoids at 7.5 mg or less prednisone equivalent per day. Measurements: Coprimary end points were differences in change from baseline in body weight and mean arterial pressure after 2 years in intention-to-treat analyses. Difference in the change of number of antihypertensive drugs after 2 years was a secondary end point. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were done to assess the robustness of primary findings. Results: A total of 1112 participants were included (mean age, 61.4 years [SD, 14.5]; 68% women). Both groups gained weight in 2 years, but glucocorticoids led, on average, to 1.1 kg (95% CI, 0.4 to 1.8 kg; P  < 0.001) more weight gain than the control treatment. Mean arterial pressure increased by about 2 mm Hg in both groups, with a between-group difference of −0.4 mm Hg (CI, −3.0 to 2.2 mm Hg; P  = 0.187). These results were consistent in sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Most patients did not change the number of antihypertensive drugs, and there was no evidence of differences between groups. Limitation: Body composition was not assessed, and generalizability to non-European regions may be limited. Conclusion: This study provides robust evidence that low-dose glucocorticoids, received over 2 years for the treatment of RA, increase weight by about 1 kg but do not increase blood pressure. Primary Funding Source: None. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of long-term low-dose glucocorticoids (GCs) in RA. Methods A protocolised systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO No. CRD42021252528) of double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trials (RCTs) comparing a low dose of GCs (≤ 7.5mg/day prednisone) to placebo over at least 2 years was performed. The primary outcome investigated was adverse events (AEs). We performed random-effects meta-analyses and used the Cochrane RoB tool and GRADE to assess risk of bias and quality of evidence (QoE). Results Six trials with 1078 participants were included. There was no evidence of an increased risk of AEs (incidence rate ratio 1.08; 95% CI 0.86, 1.34; P  = 0.52); however, the QoE was low. The risks of death, serious AEs, withdrawals due to AEs, and AEs of special interest did not differ from placebo (very low to moderate QoE). Infections occurred more frequently with GCs (risk ratio 1.4; 1.19–1.65; moderate QoE). Concerning benefit, we found moderate to high quality evidence of improvement in disease activity (DAS28: −0.23; −0.43 to −0.03), function (HAQ −0.09; −0.18 to 0.00), and Larsen scores (–4.61; −7.52 to −1.69). In other efficacy outcomes, including Sharp van der Heijde scores, there was no evidence of benefits with GCs. Conclusion There is very low to moderate QoE for no harm with long-term low dose GCs in RA, except for an increased risk of infections in GC users. The benefit-risk ratio might be reasonable forusing low-dose long-term GCs considering the moderate to high quality evidence for disease-modifying properties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors analyze a study which showed that it is possible to stop a risky and expensive treatment for patients with rheumatoid arthritis once an initial response has been obtained. They think that the study raises three questions, including the need for patients to take biological therapy, another treatment effect hidden within the trial results and the cost effectiveness of biological therapy. They also mention other treatments used in the study, such as glucocorticoids and methotrexate.

Objective To develop prediction models for individual patient harm and benefit outcomes in elderly patients with RA and comorbidities treated with chronic low-dose glucocorticoid therapy or placebo. Methods In the Glucocorticoid Low-dose Outcome in Rheumatoid Arthritis (GLORIA) study, 451 RA patients ≥65 years of age were randomized to 2 years 5 mg/day prednisolone or placebo. Eight prediction models were developed from the dataset in a stepwise procedure based on prior knowledge. The first set of four models disregarded study treatment and examined general predictive factors. The second set of four models was similar but examined the additional role of low-dose prednisolone. In each set, two models focused on harm [the occurrence of one or more adverse events of special interest (AESIs) and the number of AESIs per year) and two on benefit (early clinical response/disease activity and a lack of joint damage progression). Linear and logistic multivariable regression methods with backward selection were used to develop the models. The final models were assessed and internally validated with bootstrapping techniques. Results A few variables were slightly predictive for one of the outcomes in the models, but none were of immediate clinical value. The quality of the prediction models was sufficient and the performance was low to moderate (explained variance 12–15%, area under the curve 0.67–0.69). Conclusion Baseline factors are not helpful in selecting elderly RA patients for treatment with low-dose prednisolone given their low power to predict the chance of benefit or harm. Trial registration https://clinicaltrials.gov ; NCT02585258. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. To investigate the effect of two different high-dose, step-down prednisolone regimens on body composition in early RA patients after 26 weeks of treatment. Methods. Prednisolone-naive patients with recent-onset RA (n = 108) were randomized to either COBRA (prednisolone 60 mg/day, tapered to 7.5 mg/day in 6 weeks; MTX and SSZ) or COBRA-light therapy (prednisolone 30 mg/day, tapered to 7.5 mg/day in 8 weeks and MTX). Body composition was assessed at baseline (before or soon after start of treatment) and after 26 weeks with DXA, and recorded as total body mass (TBM), total fat mass (FM), total lean mass (LM) and trunk/peripheral fat ratio. Log-ratio analyses assessed the proportional distribution of TBM (between LM, FM and bone mass) and FM (between trunk, extremities and head). The subgroup of patients with a DXA before start of treatment (n = 38) was analysed separately. Results. In the subgroup of patients with a DXA before start of treatment, TBM increased by 1.6 kg (P < 0.001) and total FM by 1.3 kg (P < 0.001). The trunk/peripheral fat ratio and the proportional distribution of TBM and FM remained stable over time. There were no differences between the treatment groups. Similar results were obtained in the study population as a whole. Conclusion. Both high-dose, step-down prednisolone regimens caused increases in TBM, mainly caused by an increase in FM, but we found no fat redistribution from peripheral to central tissues. This absence in fat redistribution contradicts the widely held assumption of rapid adverse effects of prednisolone on body composition in RA. Trial registration: ISRCTNregistry, http://www.isrctn.com, ISRCTN55552928 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports a response after switching from prednisole to dexamethasone in three D2T-RA patients with active disease despite prednisolone. Topics discussed include possible mechanisms why response to different glucocorticoids (GCs) may vary, pharmacodynamic differences between GCs, and characteristics of 3 ACPA-positive patients switched from prednisolone to dexamethasone.

Background: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the joints affecting 1% of the world population. It has major impact on patients through disability and associated comorbidities. Current treatment strategies have considerably improved the prognosis, but recent innovations (especially biologic drugs and the new class of so-called "JAK/STAT inhibitors") have important safety issues and are very costly. Glucocorticoids (GCs) are highly effective in RA, and could reduce the need for expensive treatment with biologic agents. However, despite more than 65 years of clinical experience, there is a lack of studies large enough to adequately document the benefit/harm balance. The result is inappropriate treatment strategies, i.e. both under-use and over-use of GCs, and consequently suboptimal treatment of RA.Methods: The GLORIA study is a pragmatic multicentre, 2-year, randomised, double-blind, clinical trial to assess the safety and effectiveness of a daily dose of 5 mg prednisolone or matching placebo added to standard of care in elderly patients with RA. Eligible participants are diagnosed with RA, have inadequate disease control (disease activity score, DAS28 ≥ 2.6), and are ≥ 65 years. The primary outcome measures are the time-averaged mean value of the DAS28 and the occurrence of serious adverse events or adverse events of special interest. During the trial, change in antirheumatic therapy is permitted as clinically indicated, except for GCs. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility are secondary outcomes. The main challenge is the interpretation of the trial result with two primary endpoints and the pragmatic trial design that allows co-interventions. Another challenge is the definition of safety and the relative lack of power to detect differences between treatment groups. We have chosen to define safety as the number of patients experiencing at least one serious adverse event. We also specify a decision tree to guide our conclusion on the balance of benefit and harm, and our methodology to combat potential confounding caused by co-interventions.Discussion: Pragmatic trials minimise impact on daily practice and maximise clinical relevance of the results, but analysis and interpretation of the results is challenging. We expect that the results of this trial are of importance for all rheumatologists who treat elderly patients with RA.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02585258 . Registered on 20 October 2015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]