- 作者列表："Ramos-Casals M","Brito-Zerón P","Bombardieri S","Bootsma H","De Vita S","Dörner T","Fisher BA","Gottenberg JE","Hernandez-Molina G","Kocher A","Kostov B","Kruize AA","Mandl T","Ng WF","Retamozo S","Seror R","Shoenfeld Y","Sisó-Almirall A","Tzioufas AG","Vitali C","Bowman S","Mariette X","EULAR-Sjögren Syndrome Task Force Group.
:The therapeutic management of Sjögren syndrome (SjS) has not changed substantially in recent decades: treatment decisions remain challenging in clinical practice, without a specific therapeutic target beyond the relief of symptoms as the most important goal. In view of this scenario, the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) promoted and supported an international collaborative study (EULAR SS Task Force) aimed at developing the first EULAR evidence and consensus-based recommendations for the management of patients with SjS with topical and systemic medications. The aim was to develop a rational therapeutic approach to SjS patients useful for healthcare professionals, physicians undergoing specialist training, medical students, the pharmaceutical industry and drug regulatory organisations following the 2014 EULAR standardised operating procedures. The Task Force (TF) included specialists in rheumatology, internal medicine, oral health, ophthalmology, gynaecology, dermatology and epidemiology, statisticians, general practitioners, nurses and patient representatives from 30 countries of the 5 continents. Evidence was collected from studies including primary SjS patients fulfilling the 2002/2016 criteria; when no evidence was available, evidence from studies including associated SjS or patients fulfilling previous sets of criteria was considered and extrapolated. The TF endorsed the presentation of general principles for the management of patients with SjS as three overarching, general consensus-based recommendations and 12 specific recommendations that form a logical sequence, starting with the management of the central triplet of symptoms (dryness, fatigue and pain) followed by the management of systemic disease. The recommendations address the use of topical oral (saliva substitutes) and ocular (artificial tear drops, topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, topical corticosteroids, topical CyA, serum tear drops) therapies, oral muscarinic agonists (pilocarpine, cevimeline), hydroxychloroquine, oral glucocorticoids, synthetic immunosuppressive agents (cyclophosphamide, azathioprine, methotrexate, leflunomide and mycophenolate), and biological therapies (rituximab, abatacept and belimumab). For each recommendation, levels of evidence (mostly modest) and TF agreement (mostly very high) are provided. The 2019 EULAR recommendations are based on the evidence collected in the last 16 years in the management of primary 2002 SjS patients and on discussions between a large and broadly international TF. The recommendations synthesise current thinking on SjS treatment in a set of overarching principles and recommendations. We hope that the current recommendations will be broadly applied in clinical practice and/or serve as a template for national societies to develop local recommendations.
: 近几十年来，干燥综合征 (SjS) 的治疗管理没有实质性改变: 治疗决策在临床实践中仍然具有挑战性，没有一个特定的治疗目标，超出了缓解症状作为最重要的目标。鉴于这种情况，欧洲抗风湿病联盟 (EULAR) 促进并支持一项国际合作研究 (EULAR SS特别工作组) 旨在制定第一个EULAR证据和基于共识的SjS患者局部和全身用药管理建议。目的是按照 2014 EULAR标准化操作规程，开发对医疗保健专业人员、接受专科培训的医生、医学生、制药行业和药品监管组织有用的SjS患者的合理治疗方法。工作队包括风湿病、内科、口腔健康、眼科、妇科、皮肤病流行病学学、统计学家、全科医生、来自 5 大洲 30 个国家的护士和患者代表。从包括符合 2002/2016 标准的原发性SjS患者在内的研究中收集证据; 当没有证据时，考虑和外推来自包括相关SjS或符合以前标准的患者在内的研究的证据。TF赞同将SjS患者管理的一般原则作为三个总体的、基于普遍共识的建议和 12 个具体建议的提出，这些建议形成了一个逻辑序列，从症状 (干燥乏力和疼痛) 的中心三联体的管理开始，然后是全身性疾病的管理。该建议涉及使用局部口服 (唾液替代品) 和眼部 (人工泪滴、局部非甾体抗炎药、局部皮质类固醇、局部CyA、血清泪滴) 疗法，口服毒蕈碱激动剂 (毛果芸香碱、西维美林) 、羟氯喹、口服糖皮质激素、合成免疫抑制剂 (环磷酰胺、硫唑嘌呤、甲氨蝶呤、来氟米特和霉酚酸酯)，以及生物治疗 (利妥昔单抗、阿巴西普和贝利单抗)。对于每项建议，都提供了证据水平 (大部分是适度的) 和TF一致性 (大部分是非常高的)。2019 个EULAR建议是基于过去 16 年在 2002 例原发性SjS患者管理中收集的证据，以及一个大型和广泛的国际TF之间的讨论。这些建议在一套总体原则和建议中综合了目前对SjS治疗的思考。我们希望目前的建议将广泛应用于临床实践和/或作为国家协会制定当地建议的模板。
METHODS:OBJECTIVE:Patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis or systemic lupus erythematosus are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease. However, the cardiovascular risk of patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome (SS) remains poorly studied. We aimed to investigate the association between primary SS and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. METHODS:We performed a systematic review of articles in Medline and the Cochrane Library and recent abstracts from US and European meetings, searching for reports of randomized controlled studies of cardiovascular morbidity and cardiovascular mortality in primary SS. The relative risk (RR) values for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality associated with primary SS were collected and pooled in a meta-analysis with a random-effects model by using Review Manager (Cochrane collaboration). RESULTS:The literature search revealed 484 articles and abstracts of interest; 14 studies (67,124 patients with primary SS) were included in the meta-analysis. With primary SS versus control populations, the risk was significantly increased for coronary morbidity (RR 1.34 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.06-1.38]; P = 0.01), cerebrovascular morbidity (RR 1.46 [95% CI 1.43-1.49]; P < 0.00001), heart failure rate (odds ratio 2.54 [95% CI 1.30-4.97]; P < 0.007), and thromboembolic morbidity (RR 1.78 [95% CI 1.41-2.25]; P < 0.00001), with no statistically significant increased risk of cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.48 [95% CI 0.77-2.85]; P = 0.24). CONCLUSION:This meta-analysis demonstrates that primary SS is associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity, which suggests that these patients should be screened for cardiovascular comorbidities and considered for preventive interventions, in a multidisciplinary approach with cardiologists.
METHODS:OBJECTIVE:We aimed to evaluate the comparative risk of hospitalized infection among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who initiated abatacept versus a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi). METHODS:Using claims data from Truven MarketScan database (2006-2015), we identified patients with RA ages ≥18 years with ≥2 RA diagnoses who initiated treatment with abatacept or a TNFi. The primary outcome was a composite end point of any hospitalized infection. Secondary outcomes included bacterial infection, herpes zoster, and infections affecting different organ systems. We performed 1:1 propensity score (PS) matching between the groups in order to control for baseline confounders. We estimated incidence rates (IRs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for hospitalized infection. RESULTS:We identified 11,248 PS-matched pairs of patients who initiated treatment with abatacept and TNFi with a median age of 56 years (83% were women). The IR per 1,000 person-years for any hospitalized infection was 37 among patients who initiated treatment with abatacept and 47 in those who initiated treatment with TNFi. The HR for the risk of any hospitalized infection associated with abatacept versus TNFi was 0.78 (95% CI 0.64-0.95) and remained lower when compared to infliximab (HR 0.63 [95% CI 0.47-0.85]), while no significant difference was seen when compared to adalimumab and etanercept. The risk of secondary outcomes was lower for abatacept for pulmonary infections, and similar to TNFi for the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSION:In this large cohort of patients with RA who initiated treatment with abatacept or TNFi as a first- or second-line biologic agent, we found a lower risk of hospitalized infection after initiating abatacept versus TNFi, which was driven mostly by infliximab.
METHODS:OBJECTIVE:Reducing pain is one of the main health priorities for children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA); however, some studies indicate that pain is not routinely assessed in this patient group. The aim of this study was to explore health care professionals' (HCPs) beliefs about the role of pain and the prioritization of its assessment in children and young people with JIA. METHODS:Semi-structured interviews were conducted with HCPs who manage children and young people with JIA in the UK (including consultant and trainee pediatric rheumatologists, nurses, physical therapists, and occupational therapists). Data were analyzed qualitatively following a framework analysis approach. RESULTS:Twenty-one HCPs participated. Analyses of the data identified 6 themes, including lack of training and low confidence in pain assessment, reluctance to engage in pain discussions, low prioritization of pain assessment, specific beliefs about the nature of pain in JIA, treatment of pain in JIA, and undervaluing pain reports. Assessment of pain symptoms was regarded as a low priority and some HCPs actively avoided conversations about pain. CONCLUSION:These findings indicate that the assessment of pain in children and young people with JIA may be limited by knowledge, skills, and attitudinal factors. HCPs' accounts of their beliefs about pain in JIA and their low prioritization of pain in clinical practice suggest that a shift in perceptions about pain management may be helpful for professionals managing children and young people with this condition.