Rheumatoid Arthritis: O'Dell JR

O'Dell JR. · No affiliation provided · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #18050217 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

O'Dell JR. · No affiliation provided · Ann Intern Med. · Pubmed #17371891 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

O'Dell JR. · No affiliation provided · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #17330292 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

O'Dell JR. · No affiliation provided · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #11840429 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

O'Dell JR. · No affiliation provided · Mayo Clin Proc. · Pubmed #11393494 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

O'Dell JR. · No affiliation provided · N Engl J Med. · Pubmed #9920958 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Cannella AC, O'Dell JR. · University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska 68198-3025, USA. · Drugs. · Pubmed #16903767 No free full text.

Abstract: The treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has changed dramatically in the past decade as advancements in the understanding of the pathobiology of the disease have led to novel therapeutic agents. The recognition that early diagnosis and treatment leads to improvements in morbidity and mortality has altered the therapeutic strategy such that early therapy is now considered the standard of care.This review focuses on the challenges in making the diagnosis of early RA, including a broad differential diagnosis for inflammatory polyarthritis, poor performance of the standard classification criteria, difficulty in clinical assessment of synovitis, absence of absolute laboratory tests, inability of conventional radiography to detect bony changes early, and barriers to rheumatology care. Additionally, the pathogenesis of RA is highlighted, with particular emphasis on cytokine biology as it relates to therapeutic regimens. Relevant clinical trials in early RA are reviewed and discussed, including trials of combination disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and biological therapy. The role of induction therapy as a novel therapeutic approach is highlighted. The search for predictors of response is reviewed and the external validity of the trials is analysed. Finally, the trials in early RA therapy suggest that swift intervention with combinations of medications is required for patients with severe RA. However, further research is needed to determine which regimen is appropriate for the individual patient with RA.

O'Dell JR. · Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68198-3025, USA. · N Engl J Med. · Pubmed #15201416 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Cannella AC, O'Dell JR. · Division of Rheumatology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 84117, USA. · Curr Opin Rheumatol. · Pubmed #12707569 No free full text.

Abstract: Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic and debilitating disease, affecting an estimated 1% of the population worldwide. The past decade has witnessed an explosion in our understanding of the pathophysiology of rheumatoid arthritis and therefore in our ability to more effectively target the disease process. Although a cure remains elusive, remission is an approachable goal. There has been a complete remodeling of the traditional "pyramid" by rheumatologists, who now treat rheumatoid arthritis earlier and more aggressively than ever before. Standard single therapy with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, which was previously the final step in treating rheumatoid arthritis, is now practically bypassed in the deluge of information suggesting that combinations of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs or newer biologic therapy is more effective. It is difficult to assimilate all the data and develop a rational approach; however, the bottom line is often the deciding factor: the newer agents are tremendously expensive. The intent of this article is to review recent and relevant trials in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, suggest a treatment algorithm, and argue that traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs continue to play a pivotal role.

Moreland LW, O'Dell JR. · School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1717 6th Avenue South, SRC 068, Birmingham, AL 35294-7201, USA. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #12384910 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

Wolfe F, O'Dell JR, Kavanaugh A, Wilske K, Pincus T. · National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases, Arthritis Research Center Foundation, Inc. and University of Kansas School of Medicine, Wichita, Kansas, USA. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #11409143 No free full text.

Abstract: There is general agreement regarding the most appropriate examinations and methods to use to evaluate change in status in randomized controlled trials (RCT). However, no guidelines exist to aid in determining and evaluating actual status rather than change in status, particularly when applied to individual patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In addition, methods appropriate for clinical trials may not be useful in evaluating individual patients because of time constraints. This report reviews current methods of evaluation and develops modified methods, based on data bank research that will be useful in clinical practice and in the evaluation of RCT and observational studies. Using data from longitudinal observational data banks, further reduction in the number of joints examined is evaluated to reconcile the time constraints of clinical practice with the need to maintain reliability and validity. Percentile methods to determine severity status are applied to the variables used in RCT and extended further to observational studies and routine clinical practice. Shortened joint counts, based on modifications of the Ritchie method, are identified that allow for examination of groups of 18 (clinical-18) and 16 (clinical-16) joints, the clinical-16 omitting the metatarsophalangeal joints. Using percentile charts, actual severity valuations are given to the variables evaluated in the clinic as well as in RCT. Disease activity status of clinic patients can be determined quantitatively thus allowing clinicians further insight into the status and prognosis of their patients. By quantifying disease activity severity, clinicians and 3rd party payers can better evaluate the appropriateness of and response to disease modifying antirheumatic drugs and biologic therapies. Further, RCT can be evaluated as to severity status of patients participating, and the generalizability of RCT can be better evaluated.

Wolfe F, Cush JJ, O'Dell JR, Kavanaugh A, Kremer JM, Lane NE, Moreland LW, Paulus HE, Pincus T, Russell AS, Wilskie KR. · National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases-Arthritis Research Center Foundation, Inc. and University of Kansas School of Medicine, Wichita, Kansas, USA. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #11409141 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

O'Dell JR. · Section of Rheumatology and Immunology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA. · Rheum Dis Clin North Am. · Pubmed #11396101 No free full text.

Abstract: During the last decade, numerous new treatments and treatment approaches have literally transformed current thinking about rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and, more importantly, about the way patients are treated. The nearly universal acceptance of the use of combinations of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) to more effectively treat a growing percentage of patients with RA has been a central theme. Importantly, controlled studies have now shown many combinations to be well tolerated and significantly more effective than mono-DMARD therapy.

O'Dell JR. · Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska 68198-3025, USA. · Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. · Pubmed #11358419 No free full text.

Abstract: During the past decade, many important changes have occurred in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, perhaps the most important of which has been the realization that early diagnosis and early treatment are critical. This has challenged our health-care systems to make sure that patients with early arthritis have access to the appropriate physicians. Additionally, the last decade has also seen many new treatment options become available for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. These new options have included the use of old drugs more effectively; the use of combinations of two or more disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs; new evidence to support the use of steroids; the resurrection of tetracyclines; the introduction of leflunomide; and, finally, the tumour necrosis factor inhibitors etanercept and infliximab. The availability of all these new options is clearly excellent news for patients with RA and their physicians. It is hoped that we will, in the next few years, better understand how most effectively to utilize these treatment options for the optimal care of our patients.

O'Dell JR, Scott DL. · University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68198-3025, USA. · Rheumatology (Oxford). · Pubmed #10646486 No free full text.

Abstract: Combination therapy with methotrexate may be the newest standard to which future therapies for rheumatoid arthritis are compared. Many questions remain to be answered regarding the appropriateness of such combination therapies for specific patients and clinical situations, and the optimal therapeutic combinations. Other unanswered questions regarding combination therapy include the need for appropriate monitoring, long-term safety and cost-benefit implications. Future research is needed to clarify the role of biological response modifiers (e.g. anti-tumour necrosis factor therapies) and matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors, both as components of and alternatives to methotrexate combination regimens.

Pincus T, O'Dell JR, Kremer JM. · Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. · Ann Intern Med. · Pubmed #10577301 links to  free full text

Abstract: The traditional "pyramid" or sequential approach to treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis involved use of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug for months to years while seeking to avoid use of second-line antirheumatic drugs until evidence of joint damage was seen. This approach led to short-term reduction of inflammation and a few remissions. However, long-term remissions were rare, and most patients experienced poor long-term outcomes, including joint destruction, severe functional declines, considerable economic losses, work disability, and premature mortality. At this time, a "preventive" strategy is evolving in which early aggressive treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs is used, seeking to minimize long-term joint damage. When residual inflammation remains after maximum doses of single agents, as is usually the case, combinations of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs appear to be a reasonable consideration for many patients. Methotrexate is the most commonly used "anchor drug" in combination therapy. Evidence from randomized, controlled clinical trials and observational studies have indicated increased efficacy and acceptable (and often lower) toxicity for combinations of methotrexate plus cyclosporine, hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, leflunomide, etanercept, and infliximab. Further studies lasting 5 years or more are needed to determine the long-term effectiveness, toxicities, and optimal clinical use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drug combinations. At this time, such combinations are taken by at least some patients under care of almost all rheumatologists, and it appears likely that they will be used increasingly in the coming decades.

O'Dell JR. · Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68198-3025, USA. · Drugs. · Pubmed #10193682 No free full text.

Abstract: Despite many advances in the understanding and treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, its pathophysiology remains incompletely understood. An infectious aetiology of rheumatoid arthritis has long been postulated but, even though many continue to believe that there is a 'triggering agent for rheumatoid arthritis', none has been identified. Currently, both sulfasalazine and minocycline have been shown to be effective treatments for rheumatoid arthritis and are being used increasingly. In the case of minocycline, it appears that its ability to inhibit metalloproteases is an important characteristic that may account for some or part of its action against rheumatoid arthritis. Whether the antibacterial effects of these drugs or others are important in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis continues to be investigated.

O'Dell JR, Petersen K, Leff R, Palmer W, Schned E, Blakely K, Haire C, Fernandez A. · Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, 983025, USA. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #16358366 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To prospectively determine the efficacy and safety of etanercept in combination with sulfasalazine (SSZ), hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), and gold in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A prospective open-label study enrolled 119 patients with RA who had active disease despite stable therapy with SSZ (n = 50), HCQ (n = 50), or intramuscular gold (n = 19). Primary efficacy endpoints consisted of American College of Rheumatology responses at 24 and 48 weeks. Safety was established at regularly scheduled visits. RESULTS: Patients in each etanercept combination showed significant improvement at both 24 and 48 weeks. Toxicity withdrawals by 48 weeks included gold (n = 1): proteinuria; HCQ (n = 5): septic wrist and bilateral pneumonia, rash, optic neuritis, breast cancer, squamous cancer of the tongue; and SSZ (n = 5): otitis media, elevated liver function indicators, pericarditis, rash, and gastroenteritis. The most common adverse events not requiring discontinuation from the study were injection site reactions (43% of patients) and upper respiratory type infections (34%). CONCLUSION: This study is the first to prospectively evaluate the safety of etanercept in combination with SSZ, HCQ, and gold in patients with RA. Etanercept in combination with SSZ, HCQ, or gold was efficacious and well tolerated, with a discontinuation rate of 9% (11/119) for adverse events at 48 weeks.

O'Dell JR, Leff R, Paulsen G, Haire C, Mallek J, Eckhoff PJ, Fernandez A, Blakely K, Wees S, Stoner J, Hadley S, Felt J, Palmer W, Waytz P, Churchill M, Klassen L, Moore G. · University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68198, USA. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #12115219 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of combination therapy with methotrexate (MTX) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), MTX and sulfasalazine (SSZ), and MTX, HCQ, and SSZ in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: RA patients (n = 171) who had not previously been treated with combinations of the study medications were randomized to receive 1 of the 3 treatment combinations in this 2-year, double-blind, placebo-controlled protocol. HCQ was given at a dosage of 200 mg twice a day. The dosage of MTX was accelerated from 7.5 mg/week to 17.5 mg/week in all patients who were not in remission. Similarly, the dosage of SSZ was escalated from 500 mg twice a day to 1 gm twice a day in patients who were not in remission. The primary end point of the study was the percentage of patients who had a 20% response to therapy according to the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria at 2 years. RESULTS: Intent-to-treat analysis revealed that patients receiving the triple combination responded best, with 78% achieving an ACR 20% response at 2 years, compared with 60% of those treated with MTX and HCQ (P = 0.05) and 49% of those treated with MTX and SSZ (P = 0.002). Similar trends were seen for the ACR 50% response, with 55%, 40%, and 29% of patients in the 3 treatment groups, respectively, achieving these results at 2 years (P = 0.005 for the triple combination group versus the MTX and SSZ group). All combination treatments were well-tolerated. Fourteen patients (evenly distributed among the 3 groups) withdrew from the protocol because of symptoms that were potentially related to the study medication. CONCLUSION: The triple combination of MTX, SSZ, and HCQ is well-tolerated, and its efficacy is superior to that of the double combination of MTX and SSZ and is marginally superior to that of the double combination of MTX and HCQ.

O'Dell JR, Blakely KW, Mallek JA, Eckhoff PJ, Leff RD, Wees SJ, Sems KM, Fernandez AM, Palmer WR, Klassen LW, Paulsen GA, Haire CE, Moore GF. · University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68198-3025, USA. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #11665963 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of minocycline with that of a conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD), hydroxychloroquine, in patients with early seropositive rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Sixty patients with seropositive RA of <1 year's duration who had not been previously treated with DMARDs were randomized to receive minocycline, 100 mg twice per day, or hydroxychloroquine, 200 mg twice per day, in a 2-year, double-blind protocol. All patients also received low-dose prednisone. The primary end points of the study were 1) the percentage of patients with an American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 50% improvement (ACR50) response at 2 years, and 2) the dosage of prednisone at 2 years. RESULTS: Minocycline-treated patients were more likely to achieve an ACR50 response at 2 years compared with hydroxychloroquine-treated patients (60% compared with 33%, respectively; P = 0.04). Minocycline-treated patients were also receiving less prednisone at 2 years compared with the hydroxychloroquine group (mean 0.81 mg/day compared with 3.21 mg/day, respectively; P < 0.01). In addition, patients treated with minocycline were more likely to have been completely tapered off prednisone (P = 0.03). Trends favoring the minocycline treatment group were seen when outcomes were assessed according to components of the ACR core criteria set, with the differences reaching statistical significance for patient's global assessment of disease activity (P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Minocycline is an effective DMARD in patients with early seropositive RA. Patients treated with minocycline were more likely to achieve an ACR50 response and did so while receiving less prednisone. In addition, minocycline-treated patients were more likely to have discontinued treatment with prednisone at 2 years.

Pavletic SZ, Klassen LW, Pope R, O'Dell JR, Traynor AE, Haire CE, Graziano F, Oyama Y, Barr W, Burt RK. · Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68198-7680, USA. · J Rheumatol Suppl. · Pubmed #11642500 No free full text.

Abstract: There is little information about the clinical course of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who relapse after autologous blood stem cell transplantation (ASCT). We describe 6 patients with severe RA who received ASCT in 3 US centers. Duration of followup was between 24 and 42 months posttransplant. Five patients achieved major responses but relapsed 3-22 months posttransplant. Two patients with relapse improved remarkably after restarting disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD). Two patients developed a mild RA flare at 3 and 5 months posttransplant and improved spontaneously. All 4 patients who improved after an initial disease flare remained highly functional at 14-22 months posttransplant. All patients in this study were anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) drug naive; all received a TNF blocker as a second line posttransplant salvage therapy, but only 3 responded. Future ASCT strategies need to focus on improving the durability of the early posttransplant responses.

O'Dell JR. · Department of Internal Medicine, Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68198-3025, USA. · Clin Exp Rheumatol. · Pubmed #10589358 No free full text.

Abstract: Triple combination therapy with hydroxychloroquine, sulfasalazine, and methotrexate (MTX) has been shown in double-blind, placebo-controlled studies to be significantly superior to MTX alone (Paulus 50% responses of 77% versus 33%). In long-term follow-up studies, this therapy has now been shown to be well-tolerated with continued efficacy in the majority of patients.

O'Dell JR, Paulsen G, Haire CE, Blakely K, Palmer W, Wees S, Eckhoff PJ, Klassen LW, Churchill M, Doud D, Weaver A, Moore GF. · Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha 68198-3025, USA. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #10446869 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) causes substantial morbidity and mortality, and current treatments are suboptimal. Recent studies have demonstrated the short-term efficacy of minocycline in the treatment of patients with early RA. This study was undertaken to compare patients treated with conventional therapy in the early phase of their RA and those treated with minocycline, after 4 years of followup. METHODS: Forty-six patients with seropositive RA of <1 year's duration had been enrolled in a double-blind study of minocycline (100 mg twice daily) versus placebo. After the blinded portion of the study (3-6 months, depending upon response), all patients were treated with conventional therapy. This report compares those patients randomized to receive placebo for 3 months and then conventional therapy for the duration of 4 years versus those originally randomized to receive minocycline. RESULTS: Twenty of the 23 original minocycline-treated patients and 18 of the 23 original placebo-treated patients were available for followup (mean 4 years). At followup, RA was in remission (American College of Rheumatology criteria) without disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) or steroid therapy in 8 of the patients originally treated with minocycline compared with 1 patient in the placebo group (P = 0.02). Ten patients in the minocycline group versus 16 in the original placebo group currently require DMARD therapy (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Among patients with seropositive RA, remissions are more frequent and the need for DMARD therapy is less in those treated early in the disease course with minocycline compared with those treated with conventional therapy delayed by an average of only 3 months. Minocycline appears to be an effective therapy for early RA; further investigation into its mechanism of action is needed.

Mikuls TR, Payne JB, Reinhardt RA, Thiele GM, Maziarz E, Cannella AC, Holers VM, Kuhn KA, O'Dell JR. · Department of Medicine, Nebraska Arthritis Outcomes Research Center (NAORC), University of Nebraska Medical Center and Omaha Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA. · Int Immunopharmacol. · Pubmed #18848647 No free full text.

Abstract: SUMMARY: Antibody titers to P. gingivalis are increased in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and are associated with disease-specific autoimmunity. BACKGROUND: Periodontitis (PD) has been implicated as a risk factor for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We sought to characterize antibody titers to P. gingivalis (a pathogen in PD) in subjects with RA, PD, and in healthy controls and to examine their relationship with disease autoantibodies. METHODS: P. gingivalis antibody was measured in subjects with RA (n=78), PD (n=39), and in controls (n=40). Group frequencies of bacterial titer elevations were compared using the Chi-square test and antibody titers were compared using non-parametric tests. Correlations of P. gingivalis titer with C-reactive protein (CRP), antibody to cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP), and rheumatoid factor (RF) were examined in those with RA while CRP and autoantibody concentrations were compared based on seropositivity to P. gingivalis. RESULTS: Antibody titers to P. gingivalis were highest in PD, lowest in controls, and intermediate in RA (p=0.0003). Elevations in P. gingivalis (titer> or =800) were more common in RA and PD (67% and 77%, respectively) than in controls (40%) (p=0.002). In RA, there were significant correlations with P. gingivalis titer with CRP, anti-CCP-IgM, and -IgG-2. CRP (p=0.006), anti-CCP-IgM (p=0.01) and -IgG2 (p=0.04) concentrations were higher in RA cases with P. gingivalis titers > or =800 compared to cases with titers <800. CONCLUSION: Antibodies to P. gingivalis are more common in RA subjects than controls, although lower than that in PD. Associations of P. gingivalis titers with RA-related autoantibody and CRP concentrations suggests that infection with this organism plays a role in disease risk and progression in RA.

Fay BT, Whiddon AP, Puumala S, Black NA, O'Dell JR, Mikuls TR. · Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-2055, USA. · J Clin Rheumatol. · Pubmed #18431092 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Minocycline is recognized as an effective, well-tolerated therapy in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), although its use has been associated with the development of cutaneous hyperpigmentation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical determinants and frequency of minocycline-induced hyperpigmentation in patients with RA. METHODS: A retrospective medical record review of all patients with RA seen in 2 academic rheumatology practices was performed to identify subjects who had received at least 1 month of continuous minocycline therapy. Patient demographics, disease characteristics, medication use, and medication side effects were abstracted from the medical record. Using Cox proportional hazards regression and restricting the analysis to the initial minocycline course, we examined the association of patient factors and concomitant medications with the development of hyperpigmentation. RESULTS: Of 121 patients with at least 1 minocycline course of 30 days or more, 44 (36%) developed documented hyperpigmentation, including 33 during the initial course over a median duration of 9.1 month (range 2.2-77.8 months). Hyperpigmentation was most commonly seen on the upper and lower extremities and the head/neck region. Minocycline-induced hyperpigmentation led to the discontinuation of treatment in 3 patients, with 12 additional patients receiving a dose reduction. Increasing age was the only clinical determinant significantly associated with hyperpigmentation (HR = 1.04; 95% CI 1.00-1.07, P = 0.04). There were no significant associations of sex, weight, concomitant prednisone, or aspirin use with the development of hyperpigmentation. CONCLUSIONS: Minocycline-induced hyperpigmentation is a common complication seen with minocycline use in the treatment of RA, and seems to increase with age.