Rheumatoid Arthritis: Weissman BN

Paulus HE, Di Primeo D, Sharp JT, Genant HK, Weissman BN, Weisman MH, Sanda M, Anonymous00404. · Division of Rheumatology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California 90095, USA. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #14994390 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To quantitate patient retention and radiographic progression rates in serial hand/wrist radiographs of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who were not being treated with disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD). METHODS: A total of 1433 RA patients with 1-7 years' disease duration entered a 3-year prospective randomized double-blind clinical trial comparing the nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) etodolac (300 or 1000 mg daily) and ibuprofen (2400 mg daily). Standardized hand/wrist radiographs were obtained yearly and at dropout if > 6 months after entry. DMARD were not permitted. Joint erosion, joint space narrowing (JSN), and total scores of 3 readers were averaged. RESULTS: At entry, mean duration of RA was 3.5 years (range 1-7); ages were 21-78 years; patients were 71% female, 84% Caucasian, 67% rheumatoid factor (RF) positive; tender joint count was 29, swollen joint count 22, Westergren erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) 49, and C-reactive protein (CRP) 2.44. There were 824 (57.5%) patients who completed >or= 6 months and had paired radiographs; 46% completed 48 weeks; 31%, 98 weeks; and 19%, 147 weeks. Months between paired radiographs (time in study) averaged 23.1 (range 6-36). Mean progression rates for total, erosion, and JSN scores (5.08, 2.53, and 2.54 units per year, respectively) were significantly associated with time in study, baseline RF, ESR, CRP, swollen joint count, presence of erosions at entry, and with 20% and 50% composite clinical responses. Painful joint count and RA duration were weakly associated only with progression of erosions. Progression rates were not associated with age, sex, corticosteroid use, or prior DMARD use. Patients who completed the 3-year trial had less severe disease activity and radiographic progression than those who dropped out. CONCLUSION: In this 3-year prospective double-blind clinical trial that prohibited DMARD, retention rates (57.5%, 46%, 31%, and 19% at 0.5, 1, 2, and 3 years) were similar to those in the non-DMARD-treated placebo groups of recent published studies. Radiographic progression rates are reported for 824 non-DMARD-treated patients during RA of 1-10 years' duration. This information may be useful as background information in the interpretation of longterm clinical trials that evaluate joint radiographic outcomes.

Paulus HE, Di Primeo D, Sanda M, Lynch JM, Schwartz BA, Sharp JT, Genant HK, Weissman BN. · Division of Rheumatology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #10914843 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The reported prevention of joint damage during treatment with prednisolone 7.5 mg daily in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA)3 may have important implications for management of RA. We evaluated this observation in another patient population. METHODS: Radiographic progression rates in paired hand radiographs were analyzed in 824 patients with RA who participated in a 3 year prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing the nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) etodolac (150 or 500 mg bid) and ibuprofen (600 mg qid). Disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) were not permitted. Prednisone < or=5 mg daily was continued by 197 patients (mean dose 4.37 mg daily) who had started prednisone therapy at least 6 mo before study entry, but new prednisone starts were not allowed. Standardized hand/wrist radiographs were done yearly and at dropout; joint erosion and narrowing scores of 3 readers were averaged and progression rates were compared. RESULTS: Mean duration of RA was 3.6 years (range 1-7); patients' ages were 21-78 years; 71% were women. Among the 824 patients, those taking prednisone were more likely to have had previous DMARD, and at study entry had higher radiographic scores for joint erosion and joint space narrowing and slightly higher swollen joint counts, C-reactive protein values, and rheumatoid factor titers than those not taking prednisone. However, for the subgroup of 252 patients with RA duration of 12-24 months, prestudy radiographic scores were not different in those taking or not taking prednisone. The mean (+/-SD) monthly rate of increase in erosion scores was 0.228 +/-0.37 for the prednisone patients and 0.206+/-0.35 for patients not taking prednisone (p = 0.994 by ANCOVA). The subgroup with 12 to 24 months' disease duration at entry also showed no significant effect of prednisone treatment on erosion progression. CONCLUSION: Clinically indicated low dose prednisone did not prevent progressive radiographic damage in 197 NSAID treated patients whose physicians had initiated < or =5 mg daily before study entry. The risk/benefit ratio of chronic low dose prednisone in early RA remains uncertain.

van der Heijde D, Landewé R, Boonen A, Einstein S, Herborn G, Rau R, Wassenberg S, Weissman BN, Winalski CS, Sharp JT. · Department of Rheumatology, Leiden University Medical Center, PO Box 9600, Leiden 2300 RC, The Netherlands. · Arthritis Res Ther. · Pubmed #17605816 links to  free full text

Abstract: The objective of the present study was to test the hypothesis that experts recognize repair of erosions and, if so, to determine which, if any, morphologic features permitted them to recognize the repair. We also tested whether scoring by a standard method detected repair. Seven experienced readers of radiographs in rheumatoid arthritis were presented with 64 sets of single joints-of-interest at two time points, randomized and blinded for the correct sequence. The readers assessed which joint was better, and recorded whether any of six specific features were seen. Two independent readers, experienced in scoring by the van der Heijde-modified Sharp method who were not on the expert panel, then scored the complete films that included the joint-of-interest. The panel agreed very well on which of two joints was better, and, even though they did not know the true sequence, the panel accurately assigned a sequence slightly better than chance alone (58%) but worse than their agreement on which image was 'better or worse' (78%). The readers therefore indirectly assigned repair by choosing the second film as the best. Putative repair features were seen in cases of both repair and progression, and were not discriminatory. Similar results were obtained when the experts were presented with the entire hand or foot containing the joint-of-interest. In the third repair exercise, two independent readers who scored whole hands and feet using a standard method found a mean negative score in 22/60 joints-of-interest. All 22 joints were also scored as repair by the panel. Repair was detected reliably by a majority of the panel on viewing paired images based on a better/worse decision and assigning sequence in a set of images that were blinded for sequence by an independent project manager. In this test set of images, repair was manifested by a reduction in the size of erosion in many cases. Size was one feature that aided the experts to detect repair but cannot be the only one; the experts had to find other features to determine whether a smaller erosion was the first in a sequence of radiographs in a patient with progressive damage or was the second film in a patient exhibiting repair. The change in size of erosion was also picked up by independent readers applying the van der Heijde-modified Sharp scoring method and was reflected in their scores.