Risk Factors for Relapse in Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody–Associated Vasculitis Among Patients With Relapse After Induction of Remission With Rituximab
Objective The objective of the study was to determine risk factors for relapse of antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)–associated vasculitis (AAV) after reinduction of remission with rituximab and discontinuation of maintenance therapy. Methods This is a post hoc analysis of the RITAZAREM clinical trial. Patients aged 15 years or older with AAV and a positive test for anti–proteinase‐3 or anti‐myeloperoxidase‐ANCA who achieved remission after reinduction with rituximab and glucocorticoids were randomized at month 4 to receive continued rituximab or azathioprine for a maintenance period up to 24 months, followed by observation until relapse or up to 48 months. Generalized estimating equations logistic regression identified baseline and time‐varying risk factors for relapse by the next visit for the two study phases: maintenance (months 4–24) and off‐treatment (months 24–48). Results Among 170 patients (median [interquartile range] age 59 [48–68] years, disease duration 5 [2–10] years), 99 relapses occurred (46 during maintenance). During maintenance, musculoskeletal involvement (odds ratio [OR]: 2.8, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1–7.2; P = 0.03) and higher patient global assessment (OR: 1.1, 95% CI: 1.0–1.2; P = 0.04) were associated with relapse. During the off‐treatment phase, presence of CD19 + B cells (OR: 2.5, 95% CI: 1.2–5.1; P = 0.01) and reappearance of ANCA (OR: 3.2, 95% CI: 1.3–7.7; P = 0.01) were each associated with higher relapse risk. Multivariable analysis identified markers of inflammation (changes in platelets, white blood cells, and IgA) associated with relapse. Conclusion Risk factors for relapse in AAV vary by treatment phase. Monitoring markers of inflammation and immune reconstitution may identify patients at risk for relapse, particularly after treatment withdrawal.
The Risk of Lung Cancer in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis–Associated Interstitial Lung Disease
ObjectiveWe aimed to evaluate lung cancer risk in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and RA‐interstitial lung disease (ILD).MethodsWe performed a retrospective, matched cohort study of RA and RA‐ILD within the Veterans Health Administration (VA) between 2000 and 2019. Patients with RA and RA‐ILD were identified with validated administrative‐based algorithms, then matched (up to 1:10) on age, gender, and VA enrollment year to individuals without RA. Lung cancers were identified from a VA oncology database and the National Death Index. Conditional Cox regression models assessed lung cancer risk adjusting for race, ethnicity, smoking status, Agent Orange exposure, and comorbidity burden among matched individuals. Several sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsWe matched 72,795 patients with RA with 633,937 patients without RA (mean age 63 years; 88% male). Over 4,481,323 patient‐years, 17,099 incident lung cancers occurred. RA was independently associated with an increased lung cancer risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.58 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52–1.64]), which persisted in never smokers (aHR 1.65 [95% CI 1.22–2.24]) and in those with incident RA (aHR 1.54 [95% CI 1.44–1.65]). Compared to non‐RA controls, prevalent RA‐ILD (n = 757) was more strongly associated with lung cancer risk (aHR 3.25 [95% CI 2.13–4.95]) than RA without ILD (aHR 1.57 [95% CI 1.51–1.64]). Analyses of both prevalent and incident RA‐ILD produced similar results (RA‐ILD vs non‐RA aHR 2.88 [95% CI 2.45–3.40]).ConclusionRA was associated with a >50% increased risk of lung cancer, and those with RA‐ILD represented a particularly high‐risk group with an approximate three‐fold increased risk. Increased lung cancer surveillance in RA, and especially RA‐ILD, may be a useful strategy for reducing the burden posed by the leading cause of cancer death.
2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline for the Optimal Timing of Elective Hip or Knee Arthroplasty for Patients With Symptomatic Moderate‐to‐Severe Osteoarthritis or Ad
ObjectiveTo develop evidence‐based consensus recommendations for the optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty to improve patient‐important outcomes including, but not limited to, pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year for patients with symptomatic and radiographic moderate‐to‐severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis of the hip or knee who have previously attempted nonoperative therapy, and for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective, and who have chosen to undergo elective hip or knee arthroplasty (collectively referred to as TJA).MethodsWe developed 13 clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. After a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low), and evidence tables were created. A Voting Panel, including 13 physicians and patients, discussed the PICO questions until consensus was achieved on the direction (for/against) and strength (strong/conditional) of the recommendations.ResultsThe panel conditionally recommended against delaying TJA to pursue additional nonoperative treatment including physical therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ambulatory aids, and intraarticular injections. It conditionally recommended delaying TJA for nicotine reduction or cessation. The panel conditionally recommended delay for better glycemic control for patients who have diabetes mellitus, although no specific measure or level was identified. There was consensus that obesity by itself was not a reason for delay, but that weight loss should be strongly encouraged, and the increase in operative risk should be discussed. The panel conditionally recommended against delay in patients who have severe deformity or bone loss, or in patients who have a neuropathic joint. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low quality.ConclusionThis guideline provides evidence‐based recommendations regarding the optimal timing of TJA in patients who have symptomatic and radiographic moderate‐to‐severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective to improve patient‐important outcomes, including pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year. We acknowledge that the evidence is of low quality primarily due to indirectness and hope future research will allow for further refinement of the recommendations.
2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline for the Optimal Timing of Elective Hip or Knee Arthroplasty for Patients With Symptomatic Moderate‐to‐Severe Osteoarthritis or Ad
ObjectiveTo develop evidence‐based consensus recommendations for the optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty to improve patient‐important outcomes including, but not limited to, pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year for patients with symptomatic and radiographic moderate‐to‐severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis of the hip or knee who have previously attempted nonoperative therapy, and for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective, and who have chosen to undergo elective hip or knee arthroplasty (collectively referred to as TJA).MethodsWe developed 13 clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. After a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low), and evidence tables were created. A Voting Panel, including 13 physicians and patients, discussed the PICO questions until consensus was achieved on the direction (for/against) and strength (strong/conditional) of the recommendations.ResultsThe panel conditionally recommended against delaying TJA to pursue additional nonoperative treatment including physical therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ambulatory aids, and intraarticular injections. It conditionally recommended delaying TJA for nicotine reduction or cessation. The panel conditionally recommended delay for better glycemic control for patients who have diabetes mellitus, although no specific measure or level was identified. There was consensus that obesity by itself was not a reason for delay, but that weight loss should be strongly encouraged, and the increase in operative risk should be discussed. The panel conditionally recommended against delay in patients who have severe deformity or bone loss, or in patients who have a neuropathic joint. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low quality.ConclusionThis guideline provides evidence‐based recommendations regarding the optimal timing of TJA in patients who have symptomatic and radiographic moderate‐to‐severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective to improve patient‐important outcomes, including pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year. We acknowledge that the evidence is of low quality primarily due to indirectness and hope future research will allow for further refinement of the recommendations.