Time filter

Source Type

Gossec L.,Paris-Sorbonne University | Gossec L.,Pitie Salpetriere Hospital | Smolen J.S.,Medical University of Vienna | Smolen J.S.,Hietzing Hospital | And 38 more authors.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases | Year: 2016

Background: Since the publication of the European League Against Rheumatism recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in 2012, new evidence and new therapeutic agents have emerged. The objective was to update these recommendations. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed regarding pharmacological treatment in PsA. Subsequently, recommendations were formulated based on the evidence and the expert opinion of the 34 Task Force members. Levels of evidence and strengths of recommendations were allocated. Results: The updated recommendations comprise 5 overarching principles and 10 recommendations, covering pharmacological therapies for PsA from non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), to conventional synthetic (csDMARD) and biological (bDMARD) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, whatever their mode of action, taking articular and extra-articular manifestations of PsA into account, but focusing on musculoskeletal involvement. The overarching principles address the need for shared decision-making and treatment objectives. The recommendations address csDMARDs as an initial therapy after failure of NSAIDs and local therapy for active disease, followed, if necessary, by a bDMARD or a targeted synthetic DMARD (tsDMARD). The first bDMARD would usually be a tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor. bDMARDs targeting interleukin (IL)12/23 (ustekinumab) or IL-17 pathways (secukinumab) may be used in patients for whom TNF inhibitors are inappropriate and a tsDMARD such as a phosphodiesterase 4-inhibitor (apremilast) if bDMARDs are inappropriate. If the first bDMARD strategy fails, any other bDMARD or tsDMARD may be used. Conclusions: These recommendations provide stakeholders with an updated consensus on the pharmacological treatment of PsA and strategies to reach optimal outcomes in PsA, based on a combination of evidence and expert opinion.

Alcacer-Pitarch B.,University of Leeds | Buch M.H.,University of Leeds | Gray J.,University of Leeds | Denton C.P.,University College London | And 12 more authors.
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Year: 2012

Background: Foot problems associated with Systemic Sclerosis (SSc)/Scleroderma have been reported to be both common and disabling. There are only limited data describing specifically, the mechanical changes occurring in the foot in SSc. A pilot project conducted in preparation for this trial confirmed the previous reports of foot related impairment and reduced foot function in people with SSc and demonstrated a link to mechanical etiologies. To-date there have been no formal studies of interventions directed at the foot problems experienced by people with Systemic Sclerosis. The primary aim of this trial is to evaluate whether foot pain and foot-related health status in people with Systemic Sclerosis can be improved through the provision of a simple pressure-relieving insole. Methods. The proposed trial is a pragmatic, multicenter, randomised controlled clinical trial following a completed pilot study. In four participating centres, 140 consenting patients with SSc and plantar foot pain will be randomised to receive either a commercially available pressure relieving and thermally insulating insole, or a sham insole with no cushioning or thermal properties. The primary end point is a reduction in pain measured using the Foot Function Index Pain subscale, 12 weeks after the start of intervention. Participants will complete the primary outcome measure (Foot Function Index pain sub-scale) prior to randomisation and at 12 weeks post randomisation. Secondary outcomes include participant reported pain and disability as derived from the Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Questionnaire and plantar pressures with and without the insoles in situ. Discussion. This trial protocol proposes a rigorous and potentially significant evaluation of a simple and readily provided therapeutic approach which, if effective, could be of a great benefit for this group of patients. © 2012 Alcacer-Pitarch et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Alcacer-Pitarch B.,University of Leeds | Siddle H.J.,University of Leeds | Buch M.H.,University of Leeds | Emery P.,University of Leeds | And 4 more authors.
Clinical Rheumatology | Year: 2011

The vascular and cutaneous alterations evident in systemic sclerosis/scleroderma (SSc) place the foot at risk of ulceration. The UK Podiatry Rheumatic Care Association (PRCA)/Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Alliance standards of care recommend that all people with SSc should receive at least basic information about their foot health, and that those with foot problems should have access to self-management advice and care where needed. The aim of this study was to evaluate foot health services offered in Leeds (UK) for people with SSc, against nationally agreed standards of care. Ninety-one consecutive patients with SSc were selected from either the connective tissue disease outpatient clinic (n = 70) or the specialist rheumatology foot health clinic (n = 21) at Chapel Allerton Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. All the patients completed a disease-specific audit tool developed by the UK PRCA that evaluates provision of foot health care for patients with SSc. Sixty-one patients (67%) reported having had foot problems at some point in time and 54 (59%) had current foot problems. Of these 54 patients, 17 (32%) had not received any foot care. Only 36 (39%) of the 91 patients had received any foot health information. This audit demonstrates that patients with SSc have a relatively high prevalence of self-reported foot problems. Foot health care and information are inadequate for people with SSc and foot problems, and preventative information is almost non-existent. Improved foot health information will better empower patients to self-manage low risk problems, and help identify high risk problems which require specialist care. © 2011 Clinical Rheumatology.

Loading Leeds NIHR Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit collaborators
Loading Leeds NIHR Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit collaborators