Comorbidities in a Mexican mestizo cohort with established rheumatoid arthritis

External validation of the 2017 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for inflammatory myopathies in a Mexican cohort: Role of autoantibodies in the diagnosis and classification of patients with inflammatory myopathies

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective study aimed to perform the first external validation of the ACR/EULAR classification criteria for inflammatory myopathy (IIM) in a Mexican dynamic cohort where the patients were evaluated with clinical and laboratory values. As secondary objectives, we presented the clinical characteristics of the patients and included antibodies other than anti Jo1 to evaluate their impact on our population.

METHODOLOGY

This study included 70 patients with IIM and 70 patients with differential diagnoses of IIM, according to the absolute score of the classification criteria. We obtained sensitivity and specificity in the modality without biopsy, and as an exploratory analysis, we added other antibodies from the myositis extended panel. We analyzed the area under the curve (AUC) of three models: score without antibodies, with anti Jo1 and with any antibody.

RESULTS

The ACR/EULAR criteria showed increased specificity and at least similar sensitivity to that of the original cohort (85% sensitivity and 92% specificity), with a cohort point of >55%. When we classified patients into definite, probable, possible, and no IIM categories, by adding the extended myopathy panel, 6 of the 10 patients initially classified as "no IIM" changed their classification to "Probable IIM" and 4 to "Definite IIM"; of the 16 patients classified as "probable IIM," 15 changed their classification to "Definite IIM."

CONCLUSION

Considering the limitations of this study, we concluded that the 2017 EULAR/ACR criteria for IIM classification are sensitive and specific for classifying patients with IIM in the Mexican population. Additionally, the addition of antibodies other than anti-Jo1 may improve performance in certain populations.

The Hypertriglyceridemic Waist Phenotype Is Associated with Several Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Women with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) associates with cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) such as dyslipidemias and systemic inflammation. Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality. The hypertriglyceridemic waist phenotype (HTWP) identifies increased CVRF; however, information about HTWP on RA is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of HTWP with CVRF in RA.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cross-sectional study. Women (125) with RA were included (ACR, 1987). Anthropometry, bioimpedance, body mass index (BMI), disease activity score 28 (DAS28), and health assessment questionnaire disability index (HAQ-Di) were determined. The lipid profile determination includes the atherogenic index (AI) (TC/HDL) and Framingham Risk Score. HTWP is defined as a waist circumference ≥88 cm and triglycerides ≥ 150 mg/dL. Chi-squared and Student's t-tests were applied for comparisons.

RESULTS

HTWP was found in 38 (30.4%) patients. The subgroup with HTWP had a greater frequency of arterial hypertension (AHT) (57.9 vs. 37.9, p = 0.04), Type 2 DM (23.7 vs. 8.0, p= 0.02), BMI (29.7 ± 3.2, vs. 26.8 ± 4.3, p < 0.001), fat mass (39.3 ± 4.8 vs. 34.7 ± 6.8, p < 0.001), and AI (4.7 ± 1.2 vs. 3.7 ± 1.0, p < 0.001). No differences between DAS28 and HAQ-Di were found. HTWP was associated with the presence of MetS and CVR (p < 0.001 and p = 0.012, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The HTWP in RA is associated with CVRF, and its potential predictive role should be evaluated in longitudinal studies.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for trigger finger

BACKGROUND

Trigger finger is a common hand condition that occurs when movement of a finger flexor tendon through the first annular (A1) pulley is impaired by degeneration, inflammation, and swelling. This causes pain and restricted movement of the affected finger. Non-surgical treatment options include activity modification, oral and topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), splinting, and local injections with anti-inflammatory drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To review the benefits and harms of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) versus placebo, glucocorticoids, or different NSAIDs administered by the same route for trigger finger.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, www.ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO trials portal until 30 September 2020. We applied no language or publication status restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials of adult participants with trigger finger that compared NSAIDs administered topically, orally, or by injection versus placebo, glucocorticoid, or different NSAIDs administered by the same route.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or more review authors independently screened the reports, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and GRADE certainty of evidence. The seven major outcomes were resolution of trigger finger symptoms, persistent moderate or severe symptoms, recurrence of symptoms, total active range of finger motion, residual pain, patient satisfaction, and adverse events. Treatment effects were reported as risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

Two RCTs conducted in an outpatient hospital setting were included (231 adult participants, mean age 58.6 years, 60% female, 95% to 100% moderate to severe disease). Both studies compared a single injection of a non-selective NSAID (12.5 mg diclofenac or 15.0 mg ketorolac) given at lower than normal doses with a single injection of a glucocorticoid (triamcinolone 20 mg or 5 mg), with maximum follow-up duration of 12 weeks or 24 weeks. In both studies, we detected risk of attrition and performance bias. One study also had risk of selection bias. The effects of treatment were sensitive to assumptions about missing outcomes. All seven outcomes were reported in one study, and five in the other. NSAID injection may offer little to no benefit over glucocorticoid injection, based on low- to very low-certainty evidence from two trials. Evidence was downgraded for bias and imprecision. There may be little to no difference between groups in resolution of symptoms at 12 to 24 weeks (34% with NSAIDs, 41% with glucocorticoids; absolute effect 7% lower, 95% confidence interval (CI) 16% lower to 5% higher; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.11; low-certainty evidence). The rate of persistent moderate to severe symptoms may be higher at 12 to 24 weeks in the NSAIDs group (28%) compared to the glucocorticoid group (14%) (absolute effect 14% higher, 95% CI 2% to 33% higher; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.46; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether NSAIDs result in fewer recurrences at 12 to 24 weeks (1%) compared to glucocorticoid (21%) (absolute effect 20% lower, 95% CI 21% to 13% lower; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.38; very low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between groups in mean total active motion at 24 weeks (235 degrees with NSAIDs, 240 degrees with glucocorticoid) (absolute effect 5% lower, 95% CI 34.54% lower to 24.54% higher; 1 study, 99 participants; MD -5.00, 95% CI -34.54 to 24.54; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between groups in residual pain at 12 to 24 weeks (20% with NSAIDs, 24% with glucocorticoid) (absolute effect 4% lower, 95% CI 11% lower to 7% higher; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.31; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between groups in participant-reported treatment success at 24 weeks (64% with NSAIDs, 68% with glucocorticoid) (absolute effect 4% lower, 95% CI 18% lower to 15% higher; 1 study, 121 participants; RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.23; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether NSAID injection has an effect on adverse events at 12 to 24 weeks (1% with NSAIDs, 1% with glucocorticoid) (absolute effect 0% difference, 95% CI 2% lower to 3% higher; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.19 to 21.42; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For adults with trigger finger, by 24 weeks' follow-up, results from two trials show that compared to glucocorticoid injection, NSAID injection offered little to no benefit in the treatment of trigger finger. Specifically, there was no difference in resolution, symptoms, recurrence, total active motion, residual pain, participant-reported treatment success, or adverse events.

Hypertriglyceridaemic waist is associated with hyperuricaemia and metabolic syndrome in rheumatoid arthritis patients

BACKGROUND

/Aim: The hypertriglyceridaemic waist (HTGW) phenotype has been described and suggested in general population as a cardiovascular risk marker. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the HTGW phenotype as a marker related to HUC and MetS in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study was designed in 250 RA Mexicans patients. The HTGW phenotype was defined as elevated waist circumference and elevated triglyceride concentration. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between the HTGW phenotype, HUC and MetS in its traditional NCEP/ATPIII versions and modified (HTGWm and MetSm).

RESULTS

The prevalence of HTGW and HTGWm it was 20.4% and 32%, respectively. All patients with HTGW presented MetS (P < 0.001), and in a multivariate model, the HTGW phenotype was the marker most closely related to HUC in comparison to components of MetS.

CONCLUSION

The HTGW may represent a marker for screening of cardiometabolic risk in RA patients, so in clinical practice can be implemented as a low-cost marker in the evaluation of the patient regardless of clinical characteristics of disease.