Rheumatoid Arthritis: Taggart A

Chakravarty K, McDonald H, Pullar T, Taggart A, Chalmers R, Oliver S, Mooney J, Somerville M, Bosworth A, Kennedy T, Anonymous00010, Anonymous00011. · Harold Wood Hospital, BHR NHS Trust, Romford, Essex RM7 OBE, UK. · Rheumatology (Oxford). · Pubmed #16940305 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Moots R, Taggart A, Walker D. · No affiliation provided · Rheumatology (Oxford). · Pubmed #12709535 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

Maddison P, Kiely P, Kirkham B, Lawson T, Moots R, Proudfoot D, Reece R, Scott D, Sword R, Taggart A, Thwaites C, Williams E. · Department of Rheumatology, Ysbyty Gwynedd Hospital, University of Wales, Bangor LL57 2PW, UK. · Rheumatology (Oxford). · Pubmed #15657072 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To determine, by consensus, the optimal use of leflunomide in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), using a multidisciplinary panel of experts and performing meta-analyses of available data. METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of experts in RA was convened. Important questions, pertinent to the use of leflunomide in the treatment of RA, were defined by consensus at an initial meeting. Each question was allocated to subgroups of two or three members, who worked separately to prepare a balanced opinion, based on published literature, data from individual patients taking part in phase II and phase III clinical trials provided by Aventis, and data from a USA-based medical claims database (AETNA). The full group then reconvened to agree on an overall consensus statement. Recommendations concerning efficacy and tolerability versus comparator drugs and placebo were derived from two new meta-analyses. RESULTS: Leflunomide was at least as effective as sulphasalazine and methotrexate, and equally well tolerated on meta-analysis of trial data. Overall withdrawal rates for all adverse events were similar for all three drugs. Avoidance of the loading dose reduces 'nuisance' side-effects (e.g. nausea), but probably delays the onset of action. Adverse events could usually be managed by dose reduction and/or symptomatic therapy. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of efficacy, safety and cost, leflunomide should be considered in patients with RA who have failed first-line DMARD drug therapy. In refractory cases, leflunomide may be used in combination with, for example, methotrexate before biological agents. Therapy should be initiated by a specialist, but repeat prescribing in general practice on a shared care basis is acceptable using agreed protocols. Clear mechanisms are required to monitor toxicity, with good communication between the patient and rheumatologist to manage nuisance side-effects and avoid unnecessary discontinuation of leflunomide.

Kiely PD, Brown AK, Edwards CJ, O'Reilly DT, Ostör AJ, Quinn M, Taggart A, Taylor PC, Wakefield RJ, Conaghan PG. · Department of Rheumatology, St Georges Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK. · Rheumatology (Oxford). · Pubmed #19401359 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: RA has a substantial impact on both patients and healthcare systems. Our objective is to advance the understanding of modern management principles in light of recent evidence concerning the condition's diagnosis and treatment. METHODS: A group of practicing UK rheumatologists formulated contemporary management principles and clinical practice recommendations concerning both diagnosis and treatment. Areas of clinical uncertainty were documented, leading to research recommendations. RESULTS: A fundamental concept governing treatment of RA is minimization of cumulative inflammation, referred to as the inflammation-time area under the curve (AUC). To achieve this, four core principles of management were identified: (i) detect and refer patients early, even if the diagnosis is uncertain: patients should be referred at the first suspicion of persistent inflammatory polyarthritis and rheumatology departments should provide rapid access to a diagnostic and prognostic service; (ii) treat RA immediately: optimizing outcomes with conventional DMARDs and biologics requires that effective treatment be started early-ideally within 3 months of symptom onset; (iii) tight control of inflammation in RA improves outcome: frequent assessments and an objective protocol should be used to make treatment changes that maintain low-disease activity/remission at an agreed target; (iv) consider the risk-benefit ratio and tailor treatment to each patient: differing patient, disease and drug characteristics require long-term monitoring of risks and benefits with adaptations of treatments to suit individual circumstances. CONCLUSION: These principles focus on effective control of the inflammatory process in RA, but optimal uptake may require changes in service provision to accommodate appropriate care pathways.