Rheumatoid Arthritis: de Bandt M

de Bandt M. · Service de rhumatologie, groupe hospitalier Bichat-Claude-Bernard, Paris. · Rev Prat. · Pubmed #10626490 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Fautrel B, Guillemin F, Meyer O, de Bandt M, Berthelot JM, Flipo RM, Lioté F, Maillefert JF, Wendling D, Saraux A, Combe B, Le Loët X, Anonymous00044, Anonymous00045, Anonymous00046. · Department of Rheumatology, Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris, France. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #19333993 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To survey rheumatologists' preferences for the choice of a second-line disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) after inadequate response with methotrexate (MTX) therapy in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Thirty-six rheumatologists stated their preferences for RA treatment after inadequate response with MTX therapy (optimal dose at least 6 months). From the initial scenario, we derived 54 vignettes varying by rheumatoid factor or anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody presence, swollen joint count, Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, and structural damage. Respondents stated their preference among 5 therapeutic options: MTX continuation, switch to another conventional DMARD, addition of another conventional DMARD, addition of anakinra, or addition of a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blocker. Presentation by pairs yielded 10 combinations of strategies for each variant, totaling 540 vignettes; participants evaluated a random sample of 180 vignettes. Determinants of each top-ranked option were analyzed by logistic regression. The compilation of these data served to define a therapeutic algorithm. RESULTS: The responses of 33 rheumatologists were analyzable. Therapeutic preferences corresponded to the top-ranked options. For patients with mild or moderately active RA, either a switch or step-up strategy to another conventional DMARD was top ranked. TNF blockers were preferred for RA patients with high disease activity or progressive structural damage. On the basis of these preferences, we developed a simple decision tree for use in daily clinical practice. CONCLUSION: Our simple, easy-to-use decision tree developed from rheumatologists' preferences for therapy after failure of MTX therapy in RA treatment may guide rheumatologists in daily practice to choose a second-line DMARD.

Meyer O, de Bandt M, Berthelot JM, Cantagrel A, Combe B, Fautrel B, Flipo RM, Lioté F, Maillefert JF, Saraux A, Wendling D, Guillemin F, Le Loët X, Anonymous00174. · Department of Rheumatology, AP-HP, Bichat Paris 7 University Hospital, CHU Bichat, 46 rue Henri Huchard, 75018 Paris, France. · Joint Bone Spine. · Pubmed #17194614 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The objective was to develop a clinical practice format for choosing a second-line disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) after a 6-month course of a first-line DMARD in patients with early RA. METHODS: A panel of 34 experts selected treatment option from various scenarios using the Thurstone pairwise method. The experts had to choose between two proposed DMARDs without proposing other options. The scenarios were obtained using the three items: DAS28, rheumatoid factor status and radiographic structural damage. A sample of 240 among 480 scenarios for each expert was taken at random. Responses given by at least 20% of the experts were considered pertinent. RESULTS: Recommendations for choosing a second DMARD for early RA after failure of a 6-month course of a first-line DMARD were established according to 4 parameters: type of first-line DMARD, activity, RF status and radiographic joint damage. The results of this study suggest that in patients with early RA who fail a 6-month course of first-line DMARD therapy, the best options may be addition of corticosteroid when disease activity is moderate to high and switching to a biologic agent when further radiographic joint damage occurs, particularly in patients with positive tests for RF. CONCLUSION: Although our scenarios did not include step-up (add instead of substitute) strategies, except for corticosteroids, we feel that the format presented here can optimise the management of patients with early RA seen in clinical practice.

de Bandt M, Grossin M, Weber AJ, Chopin M, Elbim C, Pla M, Gougerot-Pocidalo MA, Gaudry M. · INSERM U479, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire Xavier Bichat, Paris, France. · Arthritis Rheum. · Pubmed #11014357 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: We assessed the clinical and histologic features of angiogenesis inhibition in a transgenic mouse model of arthritis that closely resembles rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in humans. METHODS: KRN/NOD mice, which spontaneously develop arthritis, were treated with TNP-470, an angiogenesis inhibitor. Disease was monitored by use of clinical indices and histologic examinations; circulating blood levels of vascular endothelial growth factor were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RESULTS: In the preventive protocol, with TNP-470 administration at a dosage of 60 mg/kg of body weight, the onset of arthritis was delayed and its clinical intensity was rather mild; 100% of placebo-treated transgenic mice developed arthritis that led to severe articular destruction. At a dosage of 90 mg/kg of TNP-470, the appearance of clinical signs was delayed for a longer period of time and disease was almost abolished. The therapeutic regimen alleviated clinical signs only when given during the very early stage of disease. Reductions in cartilage and bone destruction by TNP-470 treatment were observed histologically, a feature that was still evident at 30 and 80 days after injections were withdrawn. CONCLUSION: Our demonstration that in vivo administration of an angiogenesis inhibitor suppresses arthritis and protects from bone destruction provides new insight into the pathogenesis of the disease and opens new possibilities in the treatment of RA in humans.