Citations

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.

Objectives: The objective was to assess the effect of menopausal hormonal therapy (MHT) on all-cause and cause-specific mortality. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus) from inception until August 2013. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of more than 6 months of duration comparing MHT with no treatment. Pairs of independent reviewers selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the random-effects model. Results: We included 43 RCTs at moderate risk of bias. Meta-analysis showed no effect on mortality (RR 0.99 [95% CI, 0.94–1.05]), regardless of MHT type or history of preexisting heart disease. No association was found between MHT and cardiac death (RR 1.04 [95% CI 0.87–1.23]) or stroke (RR 1.49 [95% CI 0.95–2.31]). Estrogen plus progesterone use was associated with a likely increase in breast cancer mortality (RR 1.96 [95% CI 0.98–3.94]), whereas estrogen use was not. MHT use was not associated with mortality of other types of cancer. In 5 trials, MHT was likely started at a younger age: 2 RCTs with mean age less than 60 and 3 RCTs with MHT started less than 10 years after menopause. Meta-analysis of these 5 RCTs showed a reduction of mortality with MHT (RR 0.70 [95% CI 0.52–0.95]). Conclusion: The current evidence suggests that MHT does not affect the risk of death from all causes, cardiac death and death from stroke or cancer. These data may be used to support clinical and policy deliberations about the role of MHT in the care of symptomatic postmenopausal women.

OBJECT Surgical procedures and/or adjuvant therapies are effective modalities for the treatment of symptomatic spinal metastases. However, clinical results specific to the skin cancer spinal metastasis cohort are generally lacking. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature for treatments, clinical outcomes, and survival following the diagnosis of a skin cancer spinal metastasis and evaluate prognostic factors in the context of spinal skin cancer metastases stratified by tumor subtype. METHODS The authors performed a literature review using PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science to identify articles since 1950 that reported survival, clinical outcomes, and/or prognostic factors for the skin cancer patient population with spinal metastases. The methodological quality of reviews was assessed using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) tool. RESULTS Sixty-five studies met the preset criteria and were included in the analysis. Of these studies, a total of 25, 40, 25, and 12 studies included patients who underwent some form of surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or observation alone, respectively. Sixty-three of the 65 included studies were retrospective in nature (Class of Evidence [CoE] IV), and the 2 prospective studies were CoE II. Based on the studies analyzed, the median overall survival for a patient with a spinal metastasis from a primary skin malignancy is 4.0 months; survival by tumor subtype is 12.5 months for patients with basal cell carcinoma (BCC), 4.0 months for those with melanoma, 4.0 months for those with squamous cell carcinoma, 3.0 months for those with pilomatrix carcinoma, and 1.5 months for those with Merkel cell carcinoma (p < 0.0001). The overall percentage of known continued disease progression after spine metastasis diagnosis was 40.1% (n = 244/608, range 25.0%–88.9%), the rate of known recurrence of the primary skin cancer lesion was 3.5% (n = 21/608, range 0.2%–100.0%), and the rate of known spine metastasis recurrence despite treatment for all skin malignancies was 2.8% (n = 17/608, range 0.0%–33.3%). Age greater than 65 years, sacral spinal involvement, presence of a neurological deficit, and nonambulatory status were associated with decreased survival in patients diagnosed with a primary skin cancer spinal metastasis. All other clinical or prognostic parameters were of low or insufficient strength. CONCLUSIONS Patients diagnosed with a primary skin cancer metastasis to the spine have poor overall survival with the exception of those with BCC. The median duration of survival for patients who received surgical intervention alone, medical management (chemotherapy and/or radiation) alone, or the combination of therapies was similar across interventions. Age, spinal region, and neurological status may be associated with poor survival following surgery.

OBJECT The association between age and outcomes following aneurysm treatment with flow diverters such as the Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) have not been well established. Using the International Retrospective Study of the Pipeline Embolization Device (IntrePED) registry, the authors assessed the age-related clinical outcomes of patients undergoing aneurysm embolization with the PED. METHODS Patients with unruptured aneurysms in the IntrePED registry were divided into 4 age groups: ≤ 50, 51–60, 61–70, and > 70 years old. The rates of the following postoperative complications were compared between age groups using chi-square tests: spontaneous rupture, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), ischemic stroke, parent artery stenosis, cranial neuropathy, neurological morbidity, neurological mortality, combined neurological morbidity and mortality, and all-cause mortality. The association between age and these complications was tested in a multivariate logistic regression analysis adjusted for sex, number of PEDs, and aneurysm size, location, and type. RESULTS Seven hundred eleven patients with 820 unruptured aneurysms were included in this study. Univariate analysis demonstrated no significant difference in ICH rates across age groups (lowest 1.0% for patients ≤ 50 years old and highest 5.0% for patients > 70 years old, p = 0.097). There was no difference in ischemic stroke rates (lowest 3.6% for patients ≤ 50 years old and highest 6.0% for patients 50–60 years old, p = 0.73). Age > 70 years old was associated with higher rates of neurological mortality; patients > 70 years old had neurological mortality rates of 7.4% compared with 3.3% for patients 61–70 years old, 2.7% for patients 51–60 years old, and 0.5% for patients ≤ 50 years old (p = 0.006). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, increasing age was associated with higher odds of combined neurological morbidity and mortality (odds ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 1.00–1.05; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS Increasing age is associated with higher neurological morbidity and mortality after Pipeline embolization of intracranial aneurysms. However, the overall complication rates of PED treatment in this group of highly selected elderly patients (> 70 years) were acceptably low, suggesting that age alone should not be considered an exclusion criterion when considering treatment of intracranial aneurysms with the PED.

Background There is significant practice variation in oral anticoagulation ( OAC ) use following catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. It is not clear whether the risk of cardioembolism increases after discontinuation of OAC following catheter ablation. Methods and Results We identified 6886 patients within a large national administrative claims database who underwent catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2014. We assessed the effect of time off of OAC by CHA 2 DS 2 ‐ VAS c score (after adjusting for other comorbidities) on risk of cardioembolism, using Cox proportional hazards models. There was an increase in the use of non–vitamin K OAC after ablation from 0% in 2005 to 69.8% in 2014. OAC discontinuation was high, with only 60.5% and 31.3% of patients remaining on OAC at 3 and 12 months, respectively. The rate of discontinuation was higher in low‐risk patients (82% versus 62.5% at 12 months for CHA 2 DS 2 ‐ VAS c 0–1 versus ≥2, respectively; P <0.001). Stroke occurred in 1.4% of patients with CHA 2 DS 2 ‐ VAS c ≥2 and 0.3% of those with CHA 2 DS 2 ‐ VAS c 0 or 1 over the study follow‐up. The risk of cardioembolism in the first 3 months after ablation was increased among those with any time off OAC (hazard ratio 8.06 [95% CI 1.53–42.3], P <0.05). The risk of cardioembolism beyond 3 months was increased with OAC discontinuation among high‐risk patients (hazard ratio 2.48 [95% CI 1.11–5.52], P <0.05) but not low‐risk patients. Conclusion The overall risk of stroke in postablation patients is low; however, OAC discontinuation after ablation is common and is associated with increased risk of cardioembolism for all patients within the first 3 months and for high‐risk patients in the long term. Continuing OAC for at least 3 months in all patients and indefinitely in high‐risk patients appears to be the safest strategy.