SAT0450 GLUCOCORTICOID-INDUCED OSTEOPOROSIS IN PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC INFLAMMATORY RHEUMATIC DISEASES: A MULTIVARIATE LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS IDENTIFYING PREDICTIVE FACTORS FOR LOW BONE MASS

Background:

Rheumatic diseases are associated with increased systemic bone loss and fracture risk related to chronic inflammation, disease-specific, general and demographic risk factors as well as treatment with glucocorticoids (GC). Yet, there is evidence that GCs may, by adequately suppressing systemic inflammation, also have a positive effect on bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk1.

Objectives:

The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence of osteoporosis and fragility fractures in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases and to analyze the impact that treatment with GCs, other known risk factors and preventive measures have on bone health in these patients.

Methods:

Rh-GIOP is an ongoing prospective observational study collecting and analyzing disease- and bone-related data from patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases and psoriasis treated with GCs. In this cross-sectional analysis, we evaluated the initial visit of 1091 patients. A multivariate linear regression model with known or potentially influential factors adjusted for age and sex was used to identify predictors of BMD as measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Multiple imputation was applied for missing baseline covariate data.

Results:

In the total cohort of 1091 patients (75% female of which 87.5% were postmenopausal) with a mean age of 62.1 (±13.2) years, the prevalence of osteoporosis by DXA was 21.7%, while fragility fractures have occurred in 31.2% of the study population (6.7% vertebral, 27.7% non-vertebral). Current GC therapy was common (64.9%), with a median daily dose of 5.0mg [0.0;7.5], a mean life-time total GC dose of 17.7g (±24.6), and a mean GC therapy duration of 7.8 years (±8.5). Bisphosphonates were the most commonly used anti-osteoporotic drug (12.6%).

Multivariate analysis showed that BMD as expressed by the minimum T-Score at all measured sites was negatively associated with higher age, female sex and menopause as well as Denosumab and Bisphosphonate treatment. A positive association with BMD was found for body mass index as well as current and life-time (cumulative) GC dose. While comedication with proton-pump-inhibitors significantly predicted low bone mass, concomitant use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs showed a positive association with BMD. Of the measured bone-specific laboratory parameters, higher alkaline phosphatase levels were determinants of low DXA-values, while the association was positive for gamma-glutamyltransferase.

BMD was neither predicted by duration of GC treatment nor by treatment with disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs.

Predictive variables for BMD differed at the respective anatomical site. While treatment with Denosumab predicted low bone mass at the lumbar spine and not at the femoral neck, the opposite was true for health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) score. Current and life-time GC-dose as well as direct sun-exposure of more than 30 minutes daily were positively associated with bone mass at the femoral sites only.

Conclusion:

This cross-sectional analysis of a prospective cohort study quantified the prevalence of osteoporosis and identified predictive variables of BMD in patients with rheumatic diseases.

Multivariate analyses corroborated low BMD to be predicted by traditional factors like age, female sex and menopause but showed current and well as life-time GC dose to be positively associated with BMD in our cohort of patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases. This suggests that optimal management of disease activity with GCs might be beneficial in order to avoid bone loss due to inflammation.

References:

[1]Güler-Yüksel et al. “Glucocorticoids, Inflammation and Bone.” Calcified Tissue International (January 08 2018).

Disclosure of Interests:

Edgar Wiebe: None declared, Desiree Freier: None declared, Dörte Huscher: None declared, Robert Biesen: None declared, Sandra Hermann: None declared, Frank Buttgereit Grant/research support from: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Generic Assays, GSK, Hexal, Horizon, Lilly, medac, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi.

FRI0004 SURFACE AMP DEAMINASE 2 AS A NOVEL REGULATOR MODIFYING THE EXTRACELLULAR ATP-ADENOSINE BALANCE THAT IS DIFFERENTIALLY EXPRESSED IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS

Background:

Adenosine and its nucleotides represent crucial immunomodulators in the extracellular environment. ATP and ADP are released from stressed cells in states of inflammation, whereas adenosine serves as a key anti-inflammatory mediator1. The ectonucleotidases CD39 and CD73 are responsible for the sequential catabolism of ATP to adenosine via AMP, thereby promoting an anti-inflammatory milieu induced by the “adenosine halo”. Great importance has been attributed to these enzymes in the pathogenesis of autoimmune diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and as targets in cancer therapy2 3. AMPD2 mediates AMP deamination to IMP, thus constituting an ambiguous mediator both enhancing the degradation of inflammatory ATP and reducing the formation of protective adenosine. Here, we postulate that this pathway is also present on the cell surface of immune cells and modified under inflammatory conditions.

Objectives:

Therefore, we analysed surface AMPD2 expression and its modulation on distinct cell lines and primary immune cells.

Figure 1.

Surface AMPD2 as a novel regulator of the extracellular ATP-adenosine balance.

Methods:

Firstly, AMPD2 surface expression was verified by immunoprecipitation from membrane fractions isolated from cell lines (HEK293 and HMEC1) and CD14+ monocytes analysed by western blot and mass spectrometry. In addition, surface biotinylation of the aforementioned cells was performed. Also, AMPD2 surface expression was evaluated by flow cytometry, analysing both cell lines (HEK293, HMEC1, THP1, and Jurkat) and primary human immune cells from healthy donors and patients with RA.

Secondly, co-expression of surface AMPD2, CD39 and CD73 on PBMCs was analysed by flow cytometry directly after isolation as well as after a 24h culture period. Moreover, surface expression was assessed after immunostimulation and Golgi transport inhibition.

Results:

AMPD2 surface expression was confirmed by western blot and mass spectrometry of (i) precipitated AMPD2 from membrane fractions and (ii) biotinylated surface molecules in HEK293 and HMEC1 as well as CD14+ monocytes. Surface expression was reduced after AMPD2 knockdown in HEK293. Flow cytometric analysis further verified AMPD2 surface expression and revealed a significant decrease after Golgi transport inhibition (p<0.01). TLR stimulation strongly enhanced the surface expression of AMPD2 and CD39 on monocytes (p<0.05), whereas dexamethasone at high therapeutic doses inversely affected AMPD2 surface expression on lymphocytes and monocytes (p<0.01). Analysis of AMPD2 surface expression on PBMCs from RA patients revealed higher expression levels compared to sex- and age-matched healthy controls (p<0.05).

Conclusion:

We demonstrate AMPD2 surface expression on immune cells for the first time. Hence, we reveal a novel regulator of the extracellular ATP-adenosine balance that is differentially expressed in RA patients compared to healthy controls. The extracellular conversion of AMP into IMP may constitute a shunt-like mechanism adding to the CD39-CD73 system controlling immunomodulation.

References:

[1]Regateiro FS, Cobbold SP, Waldmann H. CD73 and adenosine generation in the creation of regulatory microenvironments.Clinical and experimental immunology2013;171(1):1-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2249.2012.04623.x

[2]Morandi F, Horenstein AL, Rizzo R, et al. The Role of Extracellular Adenosine Generation in the Development of Autoimmune Diseases.Mediators of inflammation2018;2018:7019398. doi: 10.1155/2018/7019398

[3]Allard B, Longhi MS, Robson SC, et al. The ectonucleotidases CD39 and CD73: Novel checkpoint inhibitor targets.Immunol Rev2017;276(1):121-44. doi: 10.1111/imr.12528

Acknowledgments:

This project is funded by an unrestricted grant by Horizon Pharma plc.

Disclosure of Interests:

Lisa Ehlers: None declared, Aditi Kuppe: None declared, Alexandra Damerau: None declared, Marieluise Kirchner: None declared, Cindy Strehl: None declared, Frank Buttgereit Grant/research support from: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Generic Assays, GSK, Hexal, Horizon, Lilly, medac, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi., Timo Gaber: None declared

FRI0369 MIMICKING GLUCOCORTICOID-INDUCED OSTEOPOROSIS USING AN IN VITRO TRABECULAR HUMAN BONE MODEL

Background:

The bone matrix consists of inorganic and organic components and a variety of specialized cells such as osteoblasts, osteocytes and osteoclasts. The bone-forming osteoblasts are responsible for the production of organic matrix components; they differentiate later into osteocytes which is accompanied by matrix mineralization. Osteoclasts are multinuclear giant cells, which resorb bone. Healthy bone homeostasis is characterized by a balanced, dynamic and continuous remodeling process. Glucocorticoids (GCs) are commonly used to successfully treat patients with inflammatory rheumatic and other autoimmune diseases. However, long-term treatment with GC can potentially lead to several adverse effects such as the inhibition of osteoblast proliferation and the increase of osteoclastic activity resulting in osteoporosis.

Objectives:

Hence, the aim of our project is to i) develop anin vitrotrabecular human bone model, ii) integrate this bone model into a perfusion system to accelerate mineralization and provide biomechanical stimuli and iii) applying prednisolone to induce osteoporosis. Here we present our initial results describing the successful differentiation of osteoblasts and osteoclasts in a 3D environment, and the accomplished integration of the bone model into a perfusion system.

Methods:

In a first step, different cultivation conditions were tested to allow optimal osteogenic or osteoclastic differentiation. To this end, a) human bone marrow derived mesenchymal stromal cells (hMSCs) were treated with osteogenic medium, and b) monocytes (isolated from buffy coats) were differentiated into osteoclasts using following protocol: incubation for 3 days with 25 ng/ml M-CSF followed by an 18-day incubation with M-CSF and 50 ng/ml RANKL. Calcification of hMSCs was evaluated via Alizarin Red S staining. Osteoclasts were identified using immunofluorescence staining observing multinucleated (DAPI) giant (ß-Actin) cells with TRAP and Cathepsin K activity. Additional gene expression analyses are currently conducted using qRT-PCR and looking for osteoclast-specific genes. In parallel to the monolayer cultures, cells were transferred on β-tricalcium phosphate (βTCP) – a suitable bony-like scaffold. Furthermore, first experiments in a dynamic bioreactor platform (OSPIN GmH) were conducted to evaluate the influence of shear stress on the cells and model systems.

Results:

We have been able to populate the βTCP scaffold with monocytes, which were differentiated into osteoclasts (morphological changes) without any effect on cellular viability as measured by Live/Dead staining. The morphological changes of those osteoclasts such as formation of filopodia could be demonstrated by scanning electron microscopy. In addition, the cultivation of βTCP populated with hMSCs in a perfusion system showed the upregulation of osteogenic markers (RUNX2, OSX) on mRNA-level.

Conclusion:

These first results of our approach to develop anin vitro3D model for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis are promising. Our next step will be the co-cultivation of osteoblasts and osteoclasts under dynamic and optimized cultivation conditions. By combining several cell types, a suitable scaffold and biomechanical stimuli (perfusion), we aim to provide a valid testing platform to study underlying disease mechanisms and for drug development.

Acknowledgments:

The project has been funded by the Elsbeth Bonhoff Foundation.

Disclosure of Interests:

Annemarie Lang: None declared, Karoline Diesing: None declared, Alexandra Damerau: None declared, Sümeyye Uzun: None declared, Moritz Pfeiffenberger: None declared, Timo Gaber: None declared, Frank Buttgereit Grant/research support from: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Generic Assays, GSK, Hexal, Horizon, Lilly, medac, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi.

SAT0372 PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS SHOW HIGHER BONE DENSITY COMPARED TO AGE AND GENDER MATCHED PATIENTS WITH ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS

Background:

The prevalence of osteoporosis in inflammatory rheumatic diseases such as psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has not been sufficiently clarified yet, and the data in the literature are heterogeneous. In addition, it is still unclear to what extent patients with PsA differ in terms of bone density from patients with other forms of spondyloarthritis such as ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

Objectives:

In an interim analysis of the Rh-GIOP Study (ClinicalTrials.gov IdentifierNCT02719314), we observed that PsA patients demonstrated more frequently normal bone density than any other patient group analyzed (suffering from e.g. rheumatoid arthritis or systemic sclerosis). The main objective of this investigation was to compare bone density data from patients with PsA and AS, as both diseases belong to the spondyloarthritis group. 1100 patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases provided the basis of Rh-GIOP, a prospective study monitoring glucocorticoid (GC)-induced osteoporosis in patients with rheumatic diseases. Rh-GIOP was established in 2015 at the Charité University Hospital. Bone mineral density data were measured by dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA).

Methods:

92 patients with PsA (65% female) were compared with 51 patients suffering from AS (35% female). Potential risk and protective factors (e.g. data on GC treatment, anti-rheumatic therapy), laboratory parameters (e.g. Vitamin D, alkaline phosphatase, calcium and inflammatory markers) and functional status (e.g. Health Assessment Questionnaire, sporting activities, back pain) were compared between these groups. Statistical analysis was performed descriptively using mean and standard deviation, t-tests for metric variables, and chi-square tests for nominal variables. Due to the heterogeneous gender distribution, an additional statistical matching was performed to compare patients matched by age and gender.

Results:

Patients with PsA displayed significantly higher minimal T-scores than patients with AS (p=0.003) even though patients with AS were younger and more often male (p<0.001). AS patients showed a higher frequency of osteopenic bone densities (p<0.05), however, no differences in the frequency of osteoporotic bone densities were found. Body-mass-index (BMI) was significantly higher (p<0.001) in PsA patients. PsA patients demonstrated a higher frequency of csDMARD use (p<0.001). Additional analyses among PsA patients with and without csDMARDs revealed also significantly higher minimal T-scores in PsA patients taking csDMARDs (90% Methotrexate), and both groups showed the same average of age and gender distribution. Furthermore, AS patients complained significantly more often of back pain (96 % vs. 74%, p=0.001) than PsA patients. No differences in GC use or cumulative GC dose were found. All results could be confirmed when groups were matched by age and gender.

Conclusion:

Our results demonstrate that patients with PsA display higher bone density compared to age and gender matched patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Possible influencing factors could be the higher frequency of csDMARD use, higher BMI or the lower frequency of back pain in PsA patients. Multivariate tests and additional biomarker investigations in larger cohorts are necessary to corroborate these findings and to identify underlying pathogenic differences which could serve for an explanation.

Disclosure of Interests:

Desiree Freier: None declared, Edgar Wiebe: None declared, Robert Biesen: None declared, Thomas Buttgereit: None declared, Sandra Hermann: None declared, Timo Gaber: None declared, Frank Buttgereit Grant/research support from: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Generic Assays, GSK, Hexal, Horizon, Lilly, medac, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi.

AB1223 RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENTS INCLUDED IN GLUCOCORTICOID TRIALS MOSTLY RESEMBLE THOSE SEEN IN OBSERVATIONAL COHORTS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Background:

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard in clinical research. Their results, however, may not be generalizable to patients in routine care.1Together with methotrexate, glucocorticoids (GCs) constitute the mainstay of therapy for many patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but it is unclear whether trial evidence is actually generalizable to real-world patients.

Objectives:

This review assesses to what extent RA patients participating in GC-RCTs differ from RA patients taking GCs in routine care.

Methods:

This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019134675). MEDLINE was searched for RCTs and, as comparators, cohort studies in RA evaluating systemic GC therapy. Cohorts were not allowed to exhibit apparent selection mechanisms concerning gender or age. Random-effects meta-analyses combined descriptive baseline characteristics that may modify the benefit-risk-ratio of various RA therapeutics. Meta-analyses were stratified by study type (RCT and CS). Stratified estimates were subsequently compared.

Results:

55 RCTs and ten cohort studies (21,657 participants overall) were included. Twelve characteristics (related to general demographics and disease activity) were reported frequently enough to allow for comparative analysis. Compared to cohorts, RCT participants were younger (-4.7 [-7.2 to -2.1] years) and had somewhat higher erythrocyte sedimentation rates (12 [6 to 18] mm/h) (Table 1). In the other ten characteristics, estimates did not differ significantly. Numerically, cohort patients had more longstanding disease and slightly more favourable disease levels in core set variables. Comorbidities could not be assessed.

Table 1.

Pooled estimates

OutcomeRCTkCohortkContrast(95% CI)pGeneral demographics Age (years)54.25058.910–4.7(–7.2 to –2.1)<0.001 Female (proportion)0.70520.73100.89(0.68 to 1.16)0.38 Current or previous smokers (proportion)0.5930.5121.38(0.61 to 3.14)0.44 BMI (kg/m2)25.9525.930.0(–1.9 to 1.9)0.98 Disease duration (months)56.54385.17–28.6(–85.6 to 28.4)0.33Disease activity ESR (mm/h)40.13128.2311.8(5.7 to 18.0)<0.001 DAS5.3244.950.4(–0.1 to 0.9)0.12 RF+, (proportion)0.67320.6361.19(0.80 to 1.78)0.39 ACPA+, (proportion)0.6470.5631.38(0.64 to 3.00)0.41 HAQ1.3311.140.2(–0.1 to 0.5)0.15 Pain (0-10)5.2264.820.4(–0.8 to 1.6)0.52 Patient global assessment (0-10)5.2174.930.3(–0.9 to 1.5)0.58

Conclusion:

The results of our study suggest that evidence from RA GC-RCTs can be generalized to most patients in routine practice. We note that comorbidities – a frequent exclusion criterion for trial participation – could not be evaluated due to insufficient reporting. Our findings contrast with a similar study on RCTs investigating biologics in RA: There, trial participants were found to differ significantly in 4 out of 8 investigated baseline characteristics.2

References:

1]Palmowski A et al. Applicability of trials in rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of trial populations showing adequate proportion of women, but underrepresentation of elderly people.Semin Arthritis Rheum2018 doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2018.10.017 and

[2]Kilcher G et al. Rheumatoid arthritis patients treated in trial and real world settings: comparison of randomized trials with registries.Rheumatology (Oxford) 2017 doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kex394

Acknowledgments:

Part of the GLORIA project and trial, funded by the EU (Horizon 2020, Grant No 634886)

Disclosure of Interests:

Andriko Palmowski: None declared, Sabrina Mai Nielsen: None declared, Thomas Buttgereit: None declared, Yannick Palmowski: None declared, Maarten Boers: None declared, Robin Christensen: None declared, Frank Buttgereit Grant/research support from: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Generic Assays, GSK, Hexal, Horizon, Lilly, medac, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi.

PARE0004 PATIENT PERSPECTIVE ON THE EFFICACY AND RISKS OF GLUCOCORTICOIDS IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS – AN INTERNATIONAL SURVEY OF 1344 PATIENTS

Background:

The Glucocorticoid Low-dose Outcome in Rheumatoid Arthritis Study (GLORIA) is an international investigator-initiated pragmatic randomized trial designed to study the effects of low-dose glucocorticoids (GCs) in elderly patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA).

The research team is also committed to promote a better understanding of the risks and benefits of these drugs among health professionals and patients. In order to achieve these goals, it is important to assess the current ideas and concerns of patients regarding GCs.

Objectives:

To evaluate the current patient perspective on the efficacy and risks of GCs in RA patients who are or have been treated with GCs.

Methods:

Patients with RA completed an online survey (with 5 closed questions regarding efficacy and safety) presented in their native language. RA patients were recruited through a variety of patient organizations representing three continents. Patients were invited to participate through national patient organizations. In the USA, patients were also invited to participate through MediGuard.org. Participants were asked for their level of agreement on a 5-point Likert scale.

Results:

1344 RA patients with exposure to GCs, from Brazil, USA, UK, Portugal, Netherlands, Germany and 24 other countries** participated: 89% female, mean age (SD) 52 (14) years and mean disease duration 13 (11) years. The majority of participants (84%) had ≥10 years of education. The duration of GCs exposure was 1.6 (4.2) years. The majority of participants had read articles or pamphlets on the benefits or harms of GC therapy.

Regarding GCs efficacy (table 1), high levels of endorsement were found: about 2/3 of patients considered that GCs as very useful in their case, more than half considered that GCs were effective even at low doses, and agreed that GC improved RA symptoms within days.

Regarding safety (table 1), 1/3 of the participants reported having suffered some form of serious adverse events (AEs) due to GCs, and 9% perceived this as “life-threatening. Adverse events had a serious impact on quality of life, according to about 1/3 of the respondents.

Conclusion:

Patients with RA exposed to GC report a strong conviction that GCs are very useful and effective for the treatment of their RA, even at low doses. This is accompanied by an important prevalence of serious AEs. Understanding the patient perspective can improve shared decision-making between patient and rheumatologist.

References:

Funding statement:This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 634886.

Disclosure of Interests:

Tânia Santiago: None declared, Marieke Voshaar Grant/research support from: part of phd research, Speakers bureau: conducting a workshop (Pfizer), Maarten de Wit Grant/research support from: Dr. de Wit reports personal fees from Ely Lilly, 2019, personal fees from Celgene, 2019, personal fees from Pfizer, 2019, personal fees from Janssen-Cilag, 2017, outside the submitted work., Consultant of: Dr. de Wit reports personal fees from Ely Lilly, 2019, personal fees from Celgene, 2019, personal fees from Pfizer, 2019, personal fees from Janssen-Cilag, 2017, outside the submitted work., Speakers bureau: Dr. de Wit reports personal fees from Ely Lilly, 2019, personal fees from Celgene, 2019, personal fees from Pfizer, 2019, personal fees from Janssen-Cilag, 2017, outside the submitted work., Pedro Carvalho: None declared, Frank Buttgereit Grant/research support from: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Generic Assays, GSK, Hexal, Horizon, Lilly, medac, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi., Maurizio Cutolo Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Actelion, Celgene, Consultant of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Speakers bureau: Sigma-Alpha, Maarten Boers: None declared, José Antonio P. da Silva Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Abbvie, Consultant of: Pfizer, AbbVie, Roche, Lilly, Novartis

AB1335-HPR HEALTH PROFESSIONALS’ PERSPECTIVE ON THE BENEFITS AND RISKS OF LOW-DOSE GLUCOCORTICOIDS IN RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS – AN INTERNATIONAL SURVEY OF 444 HEALTH PROFESSIONALS

Background:

The Glucocorticoid Low-dose Outcome in Rheumatoid Arthritis Study (GLORIA) is an international investigator-initiated pragmatic randomized trial designed to study the effects of low-dose glucocorticoids (GCs) in elderly patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA).

The research team is also committed to promote a better understanding of the risks and benefits of these drugs among health professionals and patients. In order to achieve these goals, it is important to assess the current ideas and concerns of patients regarding GCs.

Objectives:

To evaluate the current patient perspective on the efficacy and risks of GCs in RA patients who are or have been treated with GCs.

Methods:

Patients with RA completed an online survey (with 5 closed questions regarding efficacy and safety) presented in their native language. RA patients were recruited through a variety of patient organizations representing three continents. Patients were invited to participate through national patient organizations. In the USA, patients were also invited to participate through MediGuard.org. Participants were asked for their level of agreement on a 5-point Likert scale.

Results:

1344 RA patients with exposure to GCs, from Brazil, USA, UK, Portugal, Netherlands, Germany and 24 other countries** participated: 89% female, mean age (SD) 52 (14) years and mean disease duration 13 (11) years. The majority of participants (84%) had ≥10 years of education. The duration of GCs exposure was 1.6 (4.2) years. The majority of participants had read articles or pamphlets on the benefits or harms of GC therapy.

Regarding GCs efficacy (table 1), high levels of endorsement were found: about 2/3 of patients considered that GCs as very useful in their case, more than half considered that GCs were effective even at low doses, and agreed that GC improved RA symptoms within days.

Regarding safety (table 1), 1/3 of the participants reported having suffered some form of serious adverse events (AEs) due to GCs, and 9% perceived this as “life-threatening. Adverse events had a serious impact on quality of life, according to about 1/3 of the respondents.

Conclusion:

Patients with RA exposed to GC report a strong conviction that GCs are very useful and effective for the treatment of their RA, even at low doses. This is accompanied by an important prevalence of serious AEs. Understanding the patient perspective can improve shared decision-making between patient and rheumatologist.

Funding statement:

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 634886.

Disclosure of Interests:

Tânia Santiago: None declared, Marieke Voshaar Grant/research support from: part of phd research, Speakers bureau: conducting a workshop (Pfizer), Maarten de Wit Grant/research support from: Dr. de Wit reports personal fees from Ely Lilly, 2019, personal fees from Celgene, 2019, personal fees from Pfizer, 2019, personal fees from Janssen-Cilag, 2017, outside the submitted work., Consultant of: Dr. de Wit reports personal fees from Ely Lilly, 2019, personal fees from Celgene, 2019, personal fees from Pfizer, 2019, personal fees from Janssen-Cilag, 2017, outside the submitted work., Speakers bureau: Dr. de Wit reports personal fees from Ely Lilly, 2019, personal fees from Celgene, 2019, personal fees from Pfizer, 2019, personal fees from Janssen-Cilag, 2017, outside the submitted work., Pedro Carvalho: None declared, Maarten Boers: None declared, Maurizio Cutolo Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Actelion, Celgene, Consultant of: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Speakers bureau: Sigma-Alpha, Frank Buttgereit Grant/research support from: Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Generic Assays, GSK, Hexal, Horizon, Lilly, medac, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi., José Antonio P. da Silva Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Abbvie, Consultant of: Pfizer, AbbVie, Roche, Lilly, Novartis

[Oral glucocorticoids : Therapeutic use and treatment monitoring in inflammatory rheumatic diseases]

Glucocorticoids (GC) have been proven drug substances in rheumatology for more than 70 years. They act very rapidly in high doses through membrane stabilizing effects. Genomic therapeutic effects of GC even in very low doses are mainly due to inhibition of the functions of the transcription factor nuclear factor kappa B (NFkB), which promotes the synthesis of proinflammatory mediators, adhesion molecules and other regulatory proteins. Indications for the use of GC in high doses in rheumatology are always given when a life-threatening, dangerous or treatment-resistant situation is involved. Lower doses of GC, usually administered orally, are particularly used in rheumatoid arthritis, vasculitis and collagenosis. In clinical practice the general principle is to use the smallest possible effective dose of GC for the shortest possible time in order to achieve the therapeutic effect of GC without running the risk of unacceptably severe side effects.

[Controlling glucocorticoid treatment in critically ill patients with rheumatism exemplified by systemic lupus erythematosus]

BACKGROUND

Infections are one of the most common clinical problems in patients with rheumatic diseases who need to be treated with glucocorticoids in an intensive care unit. To date, there are no recommendations for the standardized control of glucocorticoid treatment in such situations.

OBJECTIVE

Based on a literature search this paper provides an overview of evidence-based and eminence-based recommendations for the control of glucocorticoid treatment under intensive care conditions using the example of systemic lupus erythematosus.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was carried out using a MeSH term search in the PubMed database.

RESULTS

Infections are one of the most common causes for the treatment of patients with rheumatic diseases in intensive care units. In the case of systemic lupus erythematosus it is particularly challenging to distinguish the infection from increased disease activity or to treat the parallel occurrence. Patients in an intensive care unit are exposed to an increased level of physical stress due to the severity of the disease, which is why special attention should be paid to symptoms of adrenocortical insufficiency. Evidence-based recommendations for prophylaxis of an adrenal crisis only exist in relation to perioperative procedures and not for the situation of severe infections.

CONCLUSION

The use of glucocorticoids in systemic lupus erythematosus is often chronic and there is an increased risk of infections. In the case of infections (or simultaneous disease flare) adequate anti-infective treatment should be administered, the treatment with glucocorticoids should be adjusted accordingly and symptoms of adrenocortical insufficiency should simultaneously be looked for.

Efficacy and safety of selective glucocorticoid receptor modulators in comparison to glucocorticoids in arthritis, a systematic review

Background

Long-term treatment with glucocorticoids (GCs) plays an important role in the management of arthritis patients, although the efficacy/safety balance is unfavorable. Alternatives with less (severe) adverse effects but with good efficacy are needed. Selective GC receptor modulators (SGRMs) are designed to engage the GC receptor with dissociative characteristics: transactivation of genes, which is mainly responsible for unwanted effects, is less strong while trans-repression of genes, reducing inflammation, is maintained. It is expected that SGRMs thus have a better efficacy/safety balance than GCs. A systematic review providing an overview of the evidence in arthritis is lacking.

Objective

To systematically review the current literature on efficacy and safety of oral SGRMs in comparison to GCs in arthritis.

Methods

A search was performed in Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library, from inception dates of databases until May 2017. Experimental studies involving animal arthritis models or human material of arthritis patients, as well as clinical studies in arthritis patients were included, provided they reported original data. All types of arthritis were included. Data was extracted on the SGRM studied and on the GC used as reference standard; the design or setting of the study was extracted as well as the efficacy and safety results.

Results

A total of 207 articles was retrieved of which 17 articles were eligible for our analysis. Two studies concerned randomized controlled trials (RCT), five studies were pre-clinical studies using human material, and 10 studies involved pre-clinical animal models (acute and/or chronic arthritis induced in mice or rats). PF-04171327, the only compound investigated in a clinical trial setting, had a better efficacy/safety balance compared to GCs: better clinical anti-inflammatory efficacy and similar safety.

Conclusion

Studies assessing both efficacy and safety of SGRMs are scarce. There is limited evidence for dissociation of anti-inflammatory and metabolic effects of the SGRMs studied. Development of many SGRMs is haltered in a preclinical phase. One SGRM showed a better clinical efficacy/safety balance.

Immunological characterization of the early human fracture hematoma

The initial inflammatory phase of fracture healing is of great importance for the clinical outcome. We aimed to develop a detailed time-dependent analysis of the initial fracture hematoma. We analyzed the composition of immune cell subpopulations by flow cytometry and the concentration of cytokines and chemokines by bioplex in 42 samples from human fractures of long bones <72 h post-trauma. The early human fracture hematoma is characterized by maturation of granulocytes and migration of monocytes/macrophages and hematopoietic stem cells. Both T helper cells and cytotoxic T cells proliferate within the fracture hematoma and/or migrate to the fracture site. Humoral immunity characteristics comprise high concentration of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-6, IL-8, IFNγ and TNFα, but also elevated concentration of anti-inflammatory cytokines, e.g., IL-1 receptor antagonist and IL-10. Furthermore, we found that cells of the fracture hematoma represent a source for key chemokines. Even under the bioenergetically restricted conditions that exist in the initial fracture hematoma, immune cells are not only present, but also survive, mature, function and migrate. They secrete a cytokine/chemokine cocktail that contributes to the onset of regeneration. We hypothesize that this specific microenvironment of the initial fracture hematoma is among the crucial factors that determine fracture healing.

[Long-term glucocorticoid therapy : Is there a safe dosage?]

Glucocorticoids have been successfully used for a long time to treat a wide range of chronic inflammatory diseases. Despite the well-accepted efficacy, possible adverse effects still provoke discussions among patients and physicians. In particular, the long-term use of glucocorticoids at higher dosages may cause unwanted adverse effects; therefore, the question arises if conditions for a safe long-term treatment regimen with these drugs can be defined. Studies specifically and comprehensively addressing this question are missing; therefore, a multidisciplinary task force comprised of medical experts and patients was formed to analyze and discuss the existing literature in order to identify conditions where long-term glucocorticoid treatment has an acceptably low level of harm. The group agreed that the actual level of harm of long-term glucocorticoid therapy depends on both drug (dose and duration) and patient-specific characteristics. The patient-specific parameters (some of which can be modified by patients and/or physicians) should always be monitored before and during treatment with glucocorticoids and optimized if necessary. A positive benefit-risk ratio can be achieved when current knowledge and existing recommendations are kept in mind and implemented in clinical practice.

Nanocoating with plant-derived pectins activates osteoblast response in vitro

A new strategy to improve osseointegration of implants is to stimulate adhesion of bone cells, bone matrix formation, and mineralization at the implant surface by modifying surface coating on the nanoscale level. Plant-derived pectins have been proposed as potential candidates for surface nanocoating of orthopedic and dental titanium implants due to 1) their osteogenic stimulation of osteoblasts to mineralize and 2) their ability to control pectin structural changes. The aim of this study was to evaluate in vitro the impact of the nanoscale plant-derived pectin Rhamnogalacturonan-I (RG-I) from potato on the osteogenic response of murine osteoblasts. RG-I from potato pulps was isolated, structurally modified, or left unmodified. Tissue culture plates were either coated with modified RG-I or unmodified RG-I or - as a control - left uncoated. The effect of nanocoating on mice osteoblast-like cells MC3T3-E1 and primary murine osteoblast with regard to proliferation, osteogenic response in terms of mineralization, and gene expression of Runt-related transcription factor 2 (Runx2), alkaline phosphate (Alpl), osteocalcin (Bglap), α-1 type I collagen (Col1a1), and receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (Rankl) were analyzed after 3, 7, 14, and 21 days, respectively. Nanocoating with pectin RG-Is increased proliferation and mineralization of MC3T3-E1 and primary osteoblast as compared to osteoblasts cultured without nanocoating. Moreover, osteogenic transcriptional response of osteoblasts was induced by nanocoating in terms of gene induction of Runx2, Alpl, Bglap, and Col1a1 in a time-dependent manner - of note - to the highest extent under the PA-coating condition. In contrast, Rankl expression was initially reduced by nanocoating in MC3T3-E1 or remained unaltered in primary osteoblast as compared to the uncoated controls. Our results showed that nanocoating of implants with modified RG-I beneficially 1) supports osteogenesis, 2) has the capacity to improve osseointegration of implants, and is therefore 3) a potential candidate for nanocoating of bone implants.

What Is the Relationship Between Morning Symptoms and Measures of Disease Activity in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis?

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about the relationship between morning symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and measures of disease activity currently used to assess RA. Information available from the Circadian Administration of Prednisone in Rheumatoid Arthritis (CAPRA-2) study was used to investigate these relationships.

METHODS

CAPRA-2 included 350 patients with RA who were symptomatic despite treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, randomized 2:1 to additional treatment with a 5-mg daily dose of delayed-release prednisone or placebo. Pearson's correlations were used to evaluate the relationships between change from baseline in symptoms (duration of morning stiffness, severity of morning stiffness, and intensity of pain on waking) and measures of disease activity (the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria [ACR20], the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints [DAS28], and the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index). Correlations were defined as weak (<0.3), moderate (0.3-0.7), or strong (>0.7).

RESULTS

There was a strong correlation between the severity of morning stiffness and the intensity of morning pain (Pearson's correlation 0.91, P < 0.001). There was a weak correlation between the duration of morning stiffness and measures of disease activity (0.24-0.28), with moderate correlations between the severity of morning stiffness or intensity of pain on waking and DAS28 or ACR20 scores (0.44-0.48). Severity of morning stiffness showed less variability and a greater effect size than did duration of morning stiffness.

CONCLUSION

Morning symptoms and measures of disease activity show weak to moderate correlations. Severity of morning stiffness showed less variability and greater effect size than did duration of morning stiffness. These findings suggest that severity is the preferred construct to measure the impact of morning stiffness in patients with RA, information that is not fully captured in the RA core set.