Matteson, Eric L.

Background and Purpose— The association between hemorrhagic stroke and use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is not well established. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observation studies to further characterize this possible association. Methods— Case–control and cohort studies that reported odds ratio, relative risk, hazard ratio, or standardized incidence ratio comparing risk of hemorrhagic stroke among NSAIDs users versus nonusers were systematically searched. Point estimates from each study were extracted. Pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for all NSAIDs and individual NSAIDs were calculated using random-effect, generic inverse variance method. Results— Ten studies were identified and included in our data analysis. As a single group, NSAIDs use was associated with a small but insignificant risk of hemorrhagic stroke with the pooled RR of 1.09 (95% CI, 0.98–1.22). Individual NSAIDs analysis revealed a significantly increased risk among diclofenac and meloxicam users (RR 1.27; 95% CI, 1.02–1.59 and RR 1.27; 95% CI, 1.08–1.50, respectively). The risk estimate for rofecoxib users was higher, but statistically nonsignificant (RR 1.35; 95% CI, 0.88–2.06). Conclusions— Overall, the use of NSAIDs is not associated with an increased risk of hemorrhagic stroke, although this risk was modestly significantly elevated in diclofenac and meloxicam users.

ObjectiveTo develop a new evidence‐based, pharmacologic treatment guideline for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).MethodsWe conducted systematic reviews to synthesize the evidence for the benefits and harms of various treatment options. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to rate the quality of evidence. We employed a group consensus process to grade the strength of recommendations (either strong or conditional). A strong recommendation indicates that clinicians are certain that the benefits of an intervention far outweigh the harms (or vice versa). A conditional recommendation denotes uncertainty over the balance of benefits and harms and/or more significant variability in patient values and preferences.ResultsThe guideline covers the use of traditional disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologic agents, tofacitinib, and glucocorticoids in early (<6 months) and established (≥6 months) RA. In addition, it provides recommendations on using a treat‐to‐target approach, tapering and discontinuing medications, and the use of biologic agents and DMARDs in patients with hepatitis, congestive heart failure, malignancy, and serious infections. The guideline addresses the use of vaccines in patients starting/receiving DMARDs or biologic agents, screening for tuberculosis in patients starting/receiving biologic agents or tofacitinib, and laboratory monitoring for traditional DMARDs. The guideline includes 74 recommendations: 23% are strong and 77% are conditional.ConclusionThis RA guideline should serve as a tool for clinicians and patients (our two target audiences) for pharmacologic treatment decisions in commonly encountered clinical situations. These recommendations are not prescriptive, and the treatment decisions should be made by physicians and patients through a shared decision‐making process taking into account patients’ values, preferences, and comorbidities. These recommendations should not be used to limit or deny access to therapies.

Objective To develop a new evidence‐based, pharmacologic treatment guideline for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods We conducted systematic reviews to synthesize the evidence for the benefits and harms of various treatment options. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to rate the quality of evidence. We employed a group consensus process to grade the strength of recommendations (either strong or conditional). A strong recommendation indicates that clinicians are certain that the benefits of an intervention far outweigh the harms (or vice versa). A conditional recommendation denotes uncertainty over the balance of benefits and harms and/or more significant variability in patient values and preferences. Results The guideline covers the use of traditional disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologic agents, tofacitinib, and glucocorticoids in early (<6 months) and established (≥6 months) RA. In addition, it provides recommendations on using a treat‐to‐target approach, tapering and discontinuing medications, and the use of biologic agents and DMARDs in patients with hepatitis, congestive heart failure, malignancy, and serious infections. The guideline addresses the use of vaccines in patients starting/receiving DMARDs or biologic agents, screening for tuberculosis in patients starting/receiving biologic agents or tofacitinib, and laboratory monitoring for traditional DMARDs. The guideline includes 74 recommendations: 23% are strong and 77% are conditional. Conclusion This RA guideline should serve as a tool for clinicians and patients (our two target audiences) for pharmacologic treatment decisions in commonly encountered clinical situations. These recommendations are not prescriptive, and the treatment decisions should be made by physicians and patients through a shared decision‐making process taking into account patients’ values, preferences, and comorbidities. These recommendations should not be used to limit or deny access to therapies.

ObjectiveThe epidemiology and clinical characteristics of sarcoid arthropathy are not well described, as only referral‐based studies have been reported. This study aimed to use the data from a geographically well‐defined population to characterize the clinical characteristics of sarcoid arthropathy.MethodsAn inception cohort of patients with incident sarcoidosis in the years 1976–2013 in a geographically well‐defined population was identified based on comprehensive individual medical records review. Inclusion required physician diagnosis supported by histopathology and radiologic features of intrathoracic sarcoidosis, compatible clinical presentation, and exclusion of other granulomatous diseases. Patients with joint pain were then identified from this cohort.ResultsIn 1976–2013, all 345 incident cases of sarcoidosis were identified. Symptoms of joint pain occurred in 42 patients (mean age 41.2 years, 57.1% female, and 95% white), and 35 patients had swollen joint(s) on physical examination. Most patients had arthralgia prior to the diagnosis of sarcoidosis, with an average time to diagnosis of 21 days. Of the 35 cases, oligoarthritis (2 to 4 joints) was the most common pattern (88% of cases), followed by monoarthritis (6%) and polyarthritis (6%). Ankles were involved in 91% of cases. In the majority of patients (88%), the arthritis resolved within 6 weeks. Classic Lofgren's syndrome was observed in 11 patients (26%).ConclusionInflammatory arthritis occurs in a minority of patients with sarcoidosis. Acute oligoarthritis with bilateral ankle involvement was the most common pattern of sarcoid arthropathy. It should be noted that the generalizability of the results may be limited, as the cohort was predominantly white.

Abstract Therapy for polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) varies widely in clinical practice as international recommendations for PMR treatment are not currently available. In this paper, we report the 2015 European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) recommendations for the management of PMR. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology as a framework for the project. Accordingly, the direction and strength of the recommendations are based on the quality of evidence, the balance between desirable and undesirable effects, patients’ and clinicians’ values and preferences, and resource use. Eight overarching principles and nine specific recommendations were developed covering several aspects of PMR, including basic and follow‐up investigations of patients under treatment, risk factor assessment, medical access for patients and specialist referral, treatment strategies such as initial glucocorticoid (GC) doses and subsequent tapering regimens, use of intramuscular GCs and disease modifying anti‐rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), as well as the roles of non‐steroidal anti‐rheumatic drugs and non‐pharmacological interventions. These recommendations will inform primary, secondary and tertiary care physicians about an international consensus on the management of PMR. These recommendations should serve to inform clinicians about best practices in the care of patients with PMR.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the incidence and prevalence of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) in Olmsted County, Minnesota in 1994–2013 and trends in juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (JRA) in 1960–2013.MethodsCases of arthritis in 1994–2013 were identified by diagnosis code with medical chart review to confirm diagnosis separately for JIA and JRA. Overall incidence rates with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were age and sex adjusted to the 2010 US white population. Comparisons were made with an earlier (1960–1993) cohort from this same population.ResultsSeventy‐one incident cases of JIA in 1994–2013 were identified, with an overall age‐ and sex‐adjusted incidence rate of 10.3 per 100,000 (95% CI 7.9–12.7). Forty‐two (59%) were female, with an incidence of 12.4 per 100,000 (95% CI 8.6–16.2), as compared to 8.3 per 100,000 (95% CI 5.2–11.3) in males. The most common subtype was oligoarthritis (63%). The mean ± SD age at diagnosis was 8.2 ± 5.3 years. The prevalence of JIA on January 1, 2000 and January 1, 2010 was 51.0 per 100,000 (95% CI 25.2–76.8) and 57.6 per 100,000 (95% CI 31.0–94.5), respectively. When the annual incidence of JRA was compared over time from 1960 to 2013, there was no significant change in incidence overall; however, the incidence decreased among females (P = 0.003). A cyclic pattern of incidence was observed, with peaks approximately every 10 years. Similar to the findings with regard to incidence, prevalence did not change overall, but decreased among females (P = 0.048). There were 4 deaths in the cohort of JRA patients diagnosed in 1960–2013; the standardized mortality ratio was 1.50 (95% CI 0.41–3.83).ConclusionIncidence of juvenile arthritis overall in Olmsted County, Minnesota has not changed significantly in the past 53 years. A consistent cyclic pattern was noted.

Objective To examine the influence of solar cycle and geomagnetic effects on the incidence of giant cell arteritis (GCA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods We used data from patients with GCA (1950–2004) and RA (1955–2007) obtained from population-based cohorts. Yearly trends in age-adjusted and sex-adjusted incidence were correlated with the F10.7 index (solar radiation at 10.7 cm wavelength, a proxy for the solar extreme ultraviolet radiation) and AL index (a proxy for the westward auroral electrojet and a measure of geomagnetic activity). Fourier analysis was performed on AL, F10.7, and GCA and RA incidence rates. Results The correlation of GCA incidence with AL is highly significant: GCA incidence peaks 0–1 year after the AL reaches its minimum (ie, auroral electrojet reaches a maximum). The correlation of RA incidence with AL is also highly significant. RA incidence rates are lowest 5–7 years after AL reaches maximum. AL, GCA and RA incidence power spectra are similar: they have a main peak (periodicity) at about 10 years and a minor peak at 4–5 years. However, the RA incidence power spectrum main peak is broader (8–11 years), which partly explains the lower correlation between RA onset and AL. The auroral electrojets may be linked to the decline of RA incidence more strongly than the onset of RA. The incidences of RA and GCA are aligned in geomagnetic latitude. Conclusions AL and the incidences of GCA and RA all have a major periodicity of about 10 years and a secondary periodicity at 4–5 years. Geomagnetic activity may explain the temporal and spatial variations, including east-west skewness in geographic coordinates, in GCA and RA incidence, although the mechanism is unknown. The link with solar, geospace and atmospheric parameters need to be investigated. These novel findings warrant examination in other populations and with other autoimmune diseases.

Objective. To investigate the incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF) among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) compared to the general population.Methods. A population-based inception cohort of Olmsted County, Minnesota, residents with incident RA in 1980–2007 and a cohort of non-RA subjects from the same population base were assembled and followed until 12/31/2008. The occurrence of AF was ascertained by medical record review.Results. The study included 813 patients with RA and 813 non-RA subjects (mean age 55.9 (SD:15.7) years, 68% women in both cohorts). The prevalence of AF was similar in the RA and non-RA cohorts at RA incidence/index date (4% versus 3%;P=0.51). The cumulative incidence of AF during follow-up was higher among patients with RA compared to non-RA subjects (18.3% versus 16.3% at 20 years;P=0.048). This difference persisted after adjustment for age, sex, calendar year, smoking, and hypertension (hazard ratio: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.07, 2.00). There was no evidence of a differential impact of AF on mortality in patients with RA compared to non-RA subjects (hazard ratio 2.5 versus 2.8; interactionP=0.31).Conclusion. The incidence of AF is increased in patients with RA, even after adjustment for AF risk factors. AF related mortality risk did not differ between patients with and without RA.

ObjectiveThe role of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is poorly understood. We examined the prevalence of CVD risk factors at initial onset of PsA and compared the observed incidence of CVD events with that predicted by the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) to determine its applicability in this patient population.MethodsA population‐based incidence cohort of 158 patients with PsA who fulfilled Classification of Psoriatic Arthritis criteria for PsA in 1989–2008 was assembled. Medical records were reviewed to ascertain CVD risk factors and CVD events. Future risk of CVD was estimated using the FRS algorithm.ResultsMean age was 43.4 years (range 19–74 years), 61% were men, and 44% were obese (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2). Fifty‐four patients (34%) presented with ≥2 CVD risk factors at PsA incidence. Among 126 patients ages ≥30 years at PsA incidence with no prior history of CVD, 33% had an FRS ≥10%, with 11% having an FRS ≥20%, and 18 experienced a CVD event in the first 10 years of disease duration. The 10‐year cumulative incidence of CVD events was 17% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 10%–24%), almost twice as high as the predicted incidence based on the FRS (standardized incidence ratio 1.80, 95% CI 1.14–2.86; P = 0.012).ConclusionThe majority of newly diagnosed PsA patients have a >10% risk of CVD within 10 years of PsA incidence. The CVD risk in these patients is higher than expected and underestimated by the FRS.