Rheumatoid Arthritis: Bombardier C

Zangger P, Kachura JR, Bombardier C, Redelmeier DA, Badley EM, Bogoch ER. · Hôpital Orthopédique de la Suisse Romande and Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, University of Lausanne, Switzerland. · Joint Bone Spine. · Pubmed #15474390 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To evaluate observer agreement using the Larsen system (LS) and a Modified Larsen system (ML) when assessing individual joints of the hands and wrists in rheumatoid arthritis, and to compare the two systems. To determine the minimally important difference (MID) for the ML. METHODS: Thirty radiographs of hands and wrists from 10 patients who presented with RA were graded by two blinded observers, using the LS and then the ML. Patients were followed for a mean of 7.2 years (range: 4-10 years). Inter- and intra-observer agreement were calculated using the kappa statistic with linear incremental weights. Inter-observer agreement was also computed for the summed score, using an intraclass correlation coefficient. Inter-observer error was estimated by calculating the mean and standard deviation of the grading differences between the two observers. Prevalence of damage was calculated as a ratio of damage: no damage and expressed as a percentage. Pairs of radiographs were comparatively graded using a seven-point Likert scale. RESULTS: The kappa statistic for inter-observer agreement was 0.38 (marginal reproducibility) for the LS and 0.52 (good reproducibility) for the ML (P = 0.004). Using a difference of one grade as perfect agreement, it was 0.56 (good reproducibility) for the LS and 0.87 (excellent reproducibility) for the ML (P = 0.001). Intra-observer agreement was high in both systems. The distribution of ML-grade differences varied according to the level of the Likert scale: for "a little bit worse", representing the smallest amount of detectable damage progression, the distribution differences peaked around two grades. This value represented a MID 87% of the time. CONCLUSIONS: The LS lacks precision for individual joints. The ML, it is proposed, has more detailed definitions of grades, and is more reliable. When pairs of radiographs were compared, a two-grade difference on the ML was the MID.

Li LC, Maetzel A, Pencharz JN, Maguire L, Bombardier C, Anonymous00064. · University Health Network and The Arthritis Society, Ontario Division, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #15077260 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To examine the use of nonpharmacologic treatment by patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients were recruited from physicians' offices in Ontario, Canada. All participants completed questionnaires that asked about their health status, use of medications and nonpharmacologic treatments, and use of health care resources. RESULTS: A total of 326 patients with OA and 253 patients with RA completed the survey on the use of nonpharmacologic treatment. Only 73% of patients with OA had been told to use nonpharmacologic modalities, but 98.8% had tried at least 1 type of treatment. About 97% of those with RA had been told to use and had tried at least 1 type of treatment. Most patients continued to use a treatment once they had tried it. CONCLUSION: The use of nonpharmacologic modalities is common among patients with arthritis. It is important that clinicians address with their patients the appropriate use of and barriers to continuing these treatments.

Maetzel A, Li LC, Pencharz J, Tomlinson G, Bombardier C, Anonymous00284. · Division of Clinical Decision Making and Health Care Research, University Health Network Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. · Ann Rheum Dis. · Pubmed #15020333 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To compare the economic burden to society incurred by patients with RA, OA, or high blood pressure (HBP) in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Consecutive subjects recruited by 52 rheumatologists (RA) and 76 family physicians (OA and HBP) were interviewed at baseline and 3 months. Information was collected on demographics, health status, and any comorbidities. A detailed, open ended resource utilisation questionnaire inquired about the use of medical and non-medical resources and patient and care giver losses of time and related expenses. Annual costs were derived as recommended by national costing guidelines and converted to American dollars (year 2000). Statistical comparisons were made using ordinary least squares regression on raw and log transformed costs, and generalised linear modelling with adjustment for age, sex, educational attainment, and presence of comorbidities. RESULTS: Baseline and 3 month interviews were completed by 253/292 (86.6%) patients with RA and 473/585 (80.9%) patients with OA and/or HBP. Baseline and total annual disease costs for RA (n = 253), OA and HBP (n = 191), OA (n = 140), and HBP (n = 142), respectively, were $9300, $4900, $5700, and US$3900. Indirect costs related to RA were up to five times higher than indirect costs incurred by patients with OA or HBP, or both. The presence of comorbidities was associated with disease costs for all diagnoses, cancelling out potential effects of age or sex. CONCLUSION: The economic burden incurred by RA significantly exceeds that related to OA and HBP, while differences between patients with a diagnosis of OA without HBP or a diagnosis of HBP alone were non-significant, largely owing to the influence of comorbidities.

Maetzel A, Strand V, Tugwell P, Wells G, Bombardier C. · University Health Network Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #12522841 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To estimate, from a public payer's perspective, the 5-year cost effectiveness of adding leflunomide (LEF) to a sequence of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) representative of a typical rheumatoid arthritis (RA) management approach adopted by Canadian rheumatologists. METHODS: A DMARD sequence including LEF was compared with one excluding it, using a 5-year simulation model where patients with RA cycle through different treatment regimens. Data were obtained through a systematic literature search (drug withdrawal rates, number and type of adverse events, American College of Rheumatology 20% responder status) and separately conducted surveys (choice of DMARD sequence, management of adverse events). Costs for adverse event management were calculated using the Ontario Schedule of Benefits, and monitoring costs were calculated according to official Canadian product monograph recommendations. Wholesale prices of all drugs were adjusted by the allowable markup and prescription fees. Utilities (as measured by the standard gamble [SG] and rating scale [RS] techniques) were obtained from 482 patients who participated in a 1-year randomized controlled trial that compared LEF, methotrexate, and placebo. Costs and utilities were discounted by 3%. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: Adding LEF to a conventional strategy of DMARDs increased the 5-year management costs by $1,231 compared with the strategy without LEF, which results in a cost-effectiveness ratio of $13,096 per additional year of response to treatment, and cost-utility ratios of $54,229 (RS) and $71,988 (SG) per quality-adjusted life-year gained. CONCLUSION: Adding LEF as a new option to a conventional sequence of DMARDs extends the time patients may benefit from DMARD therapy at a reasonable cost effectiveness and cost utility. LEF data are limited to clinical trials; data from observational studies would be needed to corroborate these findings.

Maetzel A, Wong A, Strand V, Tugwell P, Wells G, Bombardier C. · University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. · Rheumatology (Oxford). · Pubmed #10986302 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To summarize the evidence on treatment withdrawal rates reported in observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of methotrexate (MTX), parenteral gold (GST), sulphasalazine (SSZ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Two independent Medline searches were used to retrieve relevant studies published between 1966 and 1997. Those which disclosed information on the number of patients withdrawing from the drug were retained. Cumulative probabilities of survival on treatment were then computed using actuarial survival estimates, and differences were tested using log-rank, Wilcoxon and Cox proportional hazards tests. RESULTS: A total of 159 studies provided withdrawal information, and the numbers of patients who withdrew, in general or because of inefficacy or toxicity, could be abstracted from 110 studies contributing 142 treatment arms (MTX, 48; GST, 56; SSZ, 22; HCQ, 16). Data for HCQ were available only up to 24 months, but combined percentages of patients estimated to have continued MTX, GST or SSZ, respectively, for 60 months were 36, 23 and 22% when all failures were considered, 75, 73 and 53% when withdrawals due to lack of efficacy alone were considered, and 65, 36 and 48% when only withdrawals due to toxicity were taken into account. The Cox proportional hazards test performed on all withdrawals, after adjusting for year of publication and type of study, revealed that patients remained on MTX significantly longer than they did on the other three agents; however, the patients stayed significantly longer on GST than MTX when withdrawals for inefficacy were analysed separately. No significant differences in withdrawal rates were noted between observational studies and RCTs. CONCLUSION: Patients with RA stay significantly longer on MTX than on other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. Higher withdrawal rates among those given GST are mainly due to high toxicity, whereas the majority of withdrawals from SSZ and HCQ result from lack of efficacy. Withdrawal rates in observational studies are similar to those reported in RCTs.

Gabriel S, Tugwell P, O'Brien B, Yelin E, Drummond M, Ruff B, Brooks P, Bombardier C, Boers M. · Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #9918264 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Bombardier C, Laine L, Burgos-Vargas R, Davis B, Day R, Ferraz MB, Hawkey CJ, Hochberg MC, Kvien TK, Schnitzer TJ, Weaver A. · No affiliation provided · N Engl J Med. · Pubmed #16495387 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.