PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

M E Suarez-Almazor

Publications and source records attributed to M E Suarez-Almazor.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2004

Satisfactory cross cultural equivalence of the Dutch WOMAC in patients with hip osteoarthritis waiting for arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Cross cultural validity is of vital importance for international comparisons. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the validity of international Dutch-English comparisons when using the Dutch translation of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The dimensionality, reliability, construct validity, and cross cultural equivalence of the Dutch WOMAC in Dutch and Canadian patients waiting for primary total hip arthroplasty was investigated. Unidimensionality and cross cultural equivalence was quantified by principal component and Rasch analysis. Intratest reliability was quantified with Cronbach's alpha, and test-retest reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient. Construct validity was quantified by correlating sum scores of the Dutch WOMAC, Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales (Dutch AIMS2), Health Assessment Questionnaire (Dutch HAQ), and Harris Hip Score (Dutch HHS). RESULTS: The WOMAC was completed by 180 Dutch and 244 English speaking Canadian patients. Unidimensionality of the Dutch WOMAC was confirmed by principal component and Rasch analysis (good fit for 20/22 items). The intratest reliability of the Dutch WOMAC for pain and physical functioning was 0.88 and 0.96, whereas the test-retest reliability was 0.77 and 0.92, respectively. Dutch WOMAC pain sum score correlated 0.69 with Dutch HAQ pain, and 0.39 with Dutch HHS pain. Dutch WOMAC physical functioning sum score correlated 0.46 with Dutch AIMS2 mobility, 0.62 with Dutch AIMS2 walking and bending, 0.67 with Dutch HAQ disability, and 0.49 with Dutch HHS function. Differential item functioning (DIF) was shown for 6/22 Dutch items. CONCLUSIONS: The Dutch WOMAC permits valid international Dutch-English comparisons after correction for DIF.

Aged↗
PubMed2003

Number needed to treat (NNT): implication in rheumatology clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE: To calculate the number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) from the data in rheumatology clinical trials and systematic reviews. METHODS: The NNTs for the clinically important outcome measures in the rheumatology systematic reviews from the Cochrane Library, issue 2, 2000 and in the original randomised, double blind, controlled trials were calculated. The measure used for calculating the NNT in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) interventions was the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement or Paulus criteria; in osteoarthritis (OA) interventions, the improvement of pain; and in systemic sclerosis (SSc) interventions, the improvement of Raynaud's phenomenon. The NNH was calculated from the rate of withdrawals due to adverse events from the treatment. RESULTS: The data required for the calculation of the NNT were available in 15 systematic reviews and 11 original articles. For RA interventions, etanercept treatment for six months had the smallest NNT (1.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4 to 2.0), whereas leflunomide had the largest NNH (9.6; 95% CI 6.8 to 16.7). For OA treatment options, only etodolac and tenoxicam produced significant pain relief compared with placebo (NNT=4.4; 95% CI 2.4 to 24.4 and 3.8; 95% CI 2.5 to 7.3, respectively). For SSc interventions, none were shown to be efficacious in improving Raynaud's phenomenon because the 95% CI of the NNT was infinite. CONCLUSIONS: The NNT and NNH are helpful for clinicians, enabling them to translate the results from clinical trials and systematic reviews to use in routine clinical practice. Both NNT and NNH should be accompanied by a limited 95% CI and adjusted for the individual subject's baseline risk.

Antirheumatic Agents↗
PubMed2001

The effect of age on pain, function, and quality of life after total hip and knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: As utilization rates for total joint arthroplasty increase, there is a hesitancy to perform this surgery on very old patients. The objective of this prospective study was to compare pain, functional, and health-related quality-of-life outcomes after total hip and total knee arthroplasty in an older patient group (> or =80 years) and a representative younger patient group (55-79 years). METHODS: In an inception community-based cohort within a Canadian health care system, 454 patients who received primary total hip arthroplasty (n = 197) or total knee arthroplasty (n = 257) were evaluated within a month prior to surgery and 6 months postoperatively. Pain, function, and health-related quality of life were evaluated with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index and the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). RESULTS: There were no age-related differences in joint pain, function, or quality-of-life measures preoperatively or 6 months postoperatively. Furthermore, after adjusting for potential confounding effects, age was not a significant determinant of pain or function. Although those in the older and younger groups had comparable numbers of comorbid conditions and complications, those in the older group were more likely to be transferred to a rehabilitation facility than younger patients. Regardless of age, patients did not achieve comparable overall physical health when matched with the general population for age and sex. CONCLUSIONS: With increasing life expectancy and elective surgery improving quality of life, age alone is not a factor that affects the outcome of joint arthroplasty and should not be a limiting factor when considering who should receive this surgery.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2001

Change in pain and function while waiting for major joint arthroplasty.

The objective of this study was to examine the change in pain and physical function that occurs while waiting for major arthroplasty. Data were collected prospectively from a cohort of 313 patients who were waiting > 1 month for total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty. The WOMAC and the SF-36 health status instruments were administered at the time the patient was placed on the waiting list and again just before surgery. Minimal amounts of change in pain and physical and psychosocial function occurred for hip and knee arthroplasty patients while they waited. Overall, waiting time did not appear to have a negative impact on the amount of pain and dysfunction experienced.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Surfing the Net--information on the World Wide Web for persons with arthritis: patient empowerment or patient deceit?

OBJECTIVE: In the past few years access to the Internet has become readily available. Patients are increasingly seeking and obtaining health information through the Internet, most often the World Wide Web (WWW). We assessed the content, authorship, and scope of the information available on WWW in relation to rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: In an attempt to replicate use by the average person, a broad search of the Internet was conducted for the phrase "rheumatoid arthritis" using WebCrawler, a commonly used search engine. All the "hits" were critically assessed after visiting and collecting information from the respective Web sites in relation to relevance, scope, authorship, type of publication, and financial objectives. RESULTS: The search returned 537 hits. We evaluated 531-2 did not exist, 2 could not be contacted, one was not in English, and one required a membership to access. The 531 hits originated from 388 Web sites. Only 198 (51%) were considered to be relevant and 7 (2%) were of doubtful relevance. Thirty-four (17%) were posted by an individual, 57 (28%) by a nonprofit organization, 104 (51%) by a profit industry, and 10 (5%) by universities. Ninety-one (44%) promoted alternative therapies, the most common including cetyl-myristoleate, colloidal minerals, Pycnogenol, shark cartilage, and Tahitian Noni. Of the 107 sites with financial interests, 76 (71%) promoted alternative medicine. The first 100 hits only identified about a third of the nonprofit organizations or university owned Web pages. CONCLUSION: Many sites easily accessed by consumers appear to be profit based companies advertising an alternative product claimed to be effective for many conditions. These findings emphasize the need for critical evaluation of Web site contents.

Advertising↗
PubMed2001

Rating of arthritis health states by patients, physicians, and the general public. Implications for cost-utility analyses.

We elicited preferences for 2 arthritis health states (mild and severe) using visual analog scales, time tradeoff, and standard gamble by interviewing 104 individuals from the general public, 51 patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and 43 health professionals. The health scenarios were based on attributes described in a health status classification instrument, the EuroQol (EQ-5D). In addition, we compared the ratings in our survey with those obtained for the same scenarios by one of the scoring algorithms used for the EQ-5D (York weights). Statistically significant differences were observed in the ratings of the health scenarios, mostly for the severe vignette. Most of the variability was related to the method employed. The cost-utility ratio for a hypothetical intervention varied according to the method employed to determine the utility of the health states, from $15,000 to $111,000 US per quality adjusted life year (QALY). Patient derived weights resulted in cost-utility ratios that ranged from $39,000 to $222,000. Our findings show that the methodology used to elicit and analyze utilities can have substantial implications in the economic evaluation of interventions for patients with RA.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Occurrence, causes, and outcome of delirium in patients with advanced cancer: a prospective study.

CONTEXT: Delirium impedes communication and contributes to symptom distress in patients with advanced cancer. There are few prospective data on the reversal of delirium in this population. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the occurrence, precipitating factors, and reversibility of delirium in patients with advanced cancer. DESIGN: Prospective serial assessment in a consecutive cohort of 113 patients with advanced cancer. Precipitating factors were examined using standardized criteria; 104 patients met eligibility criteria. SETTING: Acute palliative care unit in a university-affiliated teaching hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Delirium occurrence and reversal rates, duration, and patient survival. Strengths of association of various precipitating factors with reversal were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) in univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: On admission, delirium was diagnosed in 44 patients (42%), and of the remaining 60, delirium developed in 27 (45%). Reversal of delirium occurred in 46 (49%) of 94 episodes in 71 patients. Terminal delirium occurred in 46 (88%) of the 52 deaths. In univariate analysis, psychoactive medications, predominantly opioids (HR, 8.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13-36.74), and dehydration (HR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.20-4.62) were associated with reversibility. Hypoxic encephalopathy (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.19-0.80) and metabolic factors (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.21-0.91) were associated with nonreversibility. In mulitivariate analysis, psychoactive medications (HR, 6.65; 95% CI, 1.49-29.62), hypoxic encephalopathy (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.15-0.70), and nonrespiratory infection (HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.08-0.64) had independent associations. Patients with delirium had poorer survival rates than controls (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Delirium is a frequent, multifactorial complication in advanced cancer. Despite its terminal presentation in most patients, delirium is reversible in approximately 50% of episodes. Delirium precipitated by opioids and other psychoactive medications and dehydration is frequently reversible with change of opioid or dose reduction, discontinuation of unnecessary psychoactive medication, or hydration, respectively.

Aged↗
PubMed2000

Clinical survival predictors in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: The clinical and epidemiological relevance of different prognostic factors for survival in patients with advanced or terminal cancer remains controversial. PURPOSES: To establish the survival of patients with cancer after diagnosis of terminal disease and to determine the predictors of survival. METHODS: An inception cohort of 227 consecutive patients aged 18 years or older with terminal cancer of the lung, breast, and gastrointestinal tract were observed from July 1, 1996, through December 31, 1998. Tumor- and treatment-specific, clinical, laboratory, demographic, and socioeconomic variables were recorded at baseline. The relationships between these characteristics and survival time were examined using univariate Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: At the time of data analysis, 208 patients (91.6%) had died; the overall median survival for the sample was 15.3 weeks. Shorter survival was independently associated (P< or =.05) with a primary tumor of the lung (vs breast and gastrointestinal tract combined), liver metastases, moderate to-severe comorbidity levels (vs absent-to-mild levels), weight loss of greater than 8.1 kg in the previous 6 months, serum albumin levels of less than 35 g/L, lymphocyte counts of less than 1 X 10(9)/L, serum lactate dehydrogenase levels of greater than 618 U/L, and clinical estimation of survival by the treating physician of less than 2 months (vs 2-6 and >6 months). Performance status, symptoms other than nausea and vomiting, tumor burden, and socioeconomic characteristics such as social support and education and income levels did not appear to be independently associated with survival after adjusting for the effect of prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS: Simple clinical and laboratory assessments are useful aids in the prediction of survival in patients with solid malignant neoplasms at the onset of terminal stages. Methodological improvements in the design and implementation of survival studies may reduce prognostic uncertainty and ultimately provide better care for the terminally ill patients and their families.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Injectable gold for rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the short-term benefit and risk of side-effects of injectable gold for rheumatoid arthritis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group trials register, and Medline, up to July 1997, using the search strategy developed by the Cochrane Collaboration (Dickersin 1994). The search was complemented with bibliography searching of the reference list of the trials retrieved from the electronic search. Key experts in the area were contacted for further published and unpublished articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized clinical trials (RCT) comparing injectable gold against placebo in patients with rheumatoid arthritis were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Methodological quality of the RCTs was asessed by two reviewers (MS, BS) (kappa=1.0). Rheumatoid arthritis outcome measures were extracted by two reviewers from the publications for the 6 month endpoint. Sufficient data was obtained to conduct a pooled analysis of the number of swollen joints, physician global assessment, patient global assessment and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). Results were analyzed as standardized weighted mean differences for swollen joints and global assessments and weighted mean differences for ESR. Toxicity was evaluated with pooled odds ratios for withdrawals. Heterogeneity was estimated using a chi-square test. Fixed effects models were used throughout. MAIN RESULTS: Four trials and 415 patients were included. A statistically significant benefit was observed for injectable gold when compared to placebo. The standardized weighted difference (effect size) between gold and placebo for the number of swollen joints was -0.5, translating into a percentage change of 30% in favour of gold adjusted for placebo. Statistically significant differences were also observed for ESR and patient and physician assessments. Twenty two percent of the treated patients withdrew from toxicity compared to 4% of controls (OR=3.9 - 95%Cl: 2.1 - 7.2). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Although its use can be limited by the incidence of serious toxicity, injectable gold has an important clinically and statistically significant benefit in the short term treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Antirheumatic Agents↗
PubMed2000

Calcium and vitamin D for corticosteroid-induced osteoporosis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of calcium and vitamin D compared to calcium alone or placebo in the prevention of bone loss in patients taking systemic corticosteroids. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal trials register, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, EMBASE and Medline up to 1996. We also conducted a hand search of abstracts from various scientific meetings and reference lists of selected trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized trials comparing calcium and vitamin D to calcium alone or placebo in patients taking systemic corticosteroids. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data was abstracted from trials by two investigators. Methodological quality was assessed in a similar manner. Analysis was performed using fixed effects models. MAIN RESULTS: Five trials were included, with 274 patients. The analysis was performed at two years after starting calcium and vitamin D. There was a significant weighted mean difference (WMD) between treatment and control groups in lumbar (WMD 2.6 (95% CI 0.7, 4.5), and radial bone mineral density (WMD 2.5 (95% CI 0.6, 4.4). The other outcome measures (femoral neck bone mass, fracture incidence, biochemical markers of bone resorption) were not significantly different. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrated a clinically and statistically significant prevention of bone loss at the lumbar spine and forearm with vitamin D and calcium in corticosteroid treated patients. Because of low toxicity and cost all patients being started on corticosteroids should receive prophylactic therapy with calcium and vitamin D.

Calcium↗
PubMed2000

Methotrexate for rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the short-term efficacy and toxicity of methotrexate (MTX) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group trials register, and Medline, up to July 1997, using the search strategy developed by the Cochrane Collaboration (Dickersin 1994). The search was complemented with bibliography searching of the reference list of the trials retrieved from the electronic search. Key experts in the area were contacted for further published and unpublished articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials comparing MTX against placebo in patients with RA. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers determined the studies to be included based on inclusion and exclusion criteria (GW, MSA). Data were independently abstracted by two reviewers (EB, MSA), and checked by a third reviewer (BS) using a pre-developed form for the rheumatoid arthritis sub-group of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group. The same two reviewers, using a validated scale (Jadad 1996) assessed the methodological quality of the trials independently. Rheumatoid arthritis outcome measures were extracted from the publications. The pooled analysis was performed using standardized mean differences (SMDs) for joint counts, pain, and global and functional assessments. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) were used for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). Toxicity was evaluated with pooled odds ratios (OR) for withdrawals. A chi-square test was used to assess heterogeneity among trials. Fixed effects models were used throughout and random effects for outcomes showing heterogeneity. MAIN RESULTS: Five trials and 300 patients were included. A statistically significant benefit was observed for MTX when compared to placebo. Statistically significant differences were observed for all measures except ESR. The standardized weighted difference (effect size) between MTX and placebo for the various outcome measures varied between -0.43 and -1.5. No differences were observed in the total number of withdrawals and dropouts (OR = 0.95), although patients on MTX were three times more likely to discontinue treatment because of adverse reactions (OR=3.47) and four times less likely to withdraw due to lack of response (OR=0.22). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Twenty-two percent of people on MTX withdrew due to adverse effects compared to seven percent of the placebo group. MTX has a substantial clinically and statistically significant benefit in the short term treatment of patients with RA.

Antirheumatic Agents↗
PubMed2000

Sulfasalazine for rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the short-term efficacy and toxicity of sulfasalazine for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group trials register, and Medline, up to July 1997, using the search strategy developed by the Cochrane Collaboration (Dickersin 1994). The search was complemented with bibliography searching of the reference list of the trials retrieved from the electronic search. Key experts in the area were contacted for further published and unpublished articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing sulfasalazine against placebo in patients with RA. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers determined the studies to be included based on inclusion and exclusion criteria (GW, MSA). Data were independently abstracted by two reviewers (EB, MSA), and checked by a third reviewer (BS) using a pre-developed form for the rheumatoid arthritis sub-group of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group. The same two reviewers, using a validated scale (Jadad 1996) assessed the methodological quality of the RCTs and CCTs independently. Rheumatoid arthritis outcome measures were extracted from the publications. The pooled analysis was performed using standardized mean differences (SMDs) for joint counts, pain, and global and functional assessments. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) were used for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). Toxicity was evaluated with pooled odds ratios (OR) for withdrawals. A chi-square test was used to assess heterogeneity among trials. Fixed effects models were used throughout and random effects for outcomes showing heterogeneity. MAIN RESULTS: Six trials, including 468 patients were included. A statistically significant benefit was observed for sulfasalazine when compared to placebo for tender and swollen joint scores, pain and ESR. The standardized weighted mean difference between treatment and placebo was -0.49 for tender and swollen joint scores, and -0.42 for pain. The difference for ESR was -17.6mm. Withdrawals from adverse reactions were significantly higher in the sulfasalazine group (OR=3.0). Patients receiving placebo were four times more likely to discontinue treatment because of lack of efficacy than patients receiving sulfasalazine. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Sulfasalazine appears to have a clinically and statistically significant benefit on the disease activity of patients with RA. Its effects on overall health status and radiological progression are not clear at this time, but would appear to be modest.

Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal↗
PubMed2000

Antimalarials for rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the short-term efficacy and toxicity of antimalarials for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group's trials register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline and Embase up to and including July 1997. We also carried out a handsearch of the reference lists of the trials retrieved from the electronic search. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing antimalarials against placebo in patients with RA DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data abstraction was carried out independently by two reviewers. The same two reviewers using Jadad's scale (Jadad 1995) assessed the methodological quality of the RCTs and CCTs. Rheumatoid arthritis outcome measures were extracted from the publications for the 6-month endpoint. The pooled analysis was performed using standardized mean differences for joint counts, pain and global assessments. Weighted mean differences were used for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). Toxicity was evaluated with pooled odds ratios for withdrawals. A chi-square test was used to assess heterogeneity among trials. Fixed effects models were used throughout. MAIN RESULTS: We found four trials, with 300 patients randomized to hydrochloroquine and 292 to placebo. Only trials evaluating hydroxychloroquine could be pooled in the analysis. A statistically significant benefit was observed when hydroxychloroquine was compared to placebo. The standardized mean differences for the various outcome measures ranged from -0.33 to -0. 52, and were statistically significant. Statistically significant differences were also observed for ESR. Overall withdrawals and withdrawals due to lack of efficacy were significantly more frequent in the placebo group. No differences were observed in withdrawals due to toxicity. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Hydroxychloroquine appears to be efficacious for the treatment of RA. Its overall effect appears to be moderate, but its low toxicity profile should be considered when treating patients with RA.

Antimalarials↗
PubMed2000

Cyclosporine for rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the short-term (up to one year) effects of cyclosporine for rheumatoid arthritis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group trials register, and Medline, up to 1997, using the search strategy developed by the Cochrane Collaboration (Dickersin 1994). The search was complemented with bibliography searching of the reference list of the trials retrieved from the electronic search. Key experts in the area were contacted for further published and unpublished articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing cyclosporine against placebo in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers determined the trials to be included based on inclusion and exclusion criteria (GW, MSA). Data were independently abstracted by two reviewers (DH, GW),and checked by a third reviewer (BS) using a pre-developed form for the rheumatoid arthritis sub-group of the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group. Methodological quality of the RCTs and CCTs was assessed by two reviewers (BS, DH). Rheumatoid arthritis outcome measures were extracted from the publications for change from baseline endpoints. Sufficient data were obtained to include in the pooled analysis the number of swollen joints, physician global assessment, patient global assessment and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). MAIN RESULTS: Three trials and 318 patients were included. A statistically significant decrease in the number of tender and swollen joints was observed for cyclosporine when compared to placebo. The standardized mean difference (SMD) for the change in the number of swollen joints was -0.969. Significant improvements in pain and the functional index were also found for cyclosporine. More side effects occurred in the cyclosporine group compared to placebo. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Cyclosporine has an important clinical benefit int the short-term (up to one year) treatment of patients with progressive rheumatoid arthritis.

Antirheumatic Agents↗
PubMed2000

Cyclophosphamide for rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the short-term effects of cyclophosphamide for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group's Register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Medline and Embase up to and including July 1997. We also carried out a handsearch of the reference lists of the trials retrieved from the electronic search. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing oral cyclophosphamide against placebo (or an active drug at a dosage considered to be ineffective) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data abstraction was carried out independently by two reviewers. The same two reviewers using Jadad's scale (Jadad 1995) assessed the methodological quality of the RCTs and CCTs. Rheumatoid arthritis outcome measures were extracted from the publications for baseline and end-of-study. The pooled analysis was performed using standardized mean differences (SMDs) for joint counts. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) were used for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). Toxicity was evaluated with pooled odds ratios for withdrawals. A chi-square test was used to assess heterogeneity among trials. Fixed effects models were used throughout. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 70 patients were included in the pooled analysis of two trials, 31 receiving cyclophosphamide. A statistically significant benefit was observed for cyclophosphamide when compared to placebo for tender and swollen joint scores: SMDs were -0.57 and -0.59 respectively. The difference in ESR also favoured the active drug but did not reach statistical significance (-12 mm, 95%CI: -26 to 2.5). One trial reported the number of patients developing new or worse erosions: the OR for cyclophosphamide compared to placebo was 0.17 (95% CI: 0.05 to 0.57). Patients receiving placebo were six times more likely to discontinue treatment because of lack of efficacy than patients receiving cyclophosphamide. Withdrawals from adverse reactions were higher in the cyclophosphamide group (Odds ratio=2.9), although this difference was not statistically significant. Side effects from cyclophosphamide included hemorrhagic cystitis, nausea, vomiting, leucopenia, thrombocytopenia, alopecia, amenorrhea and herpes zoster infections. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Cyclophosphamide appears to have a clinically and statistically significant benefit on the disease activity of patients with RA, similar to some disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) such as antimalarials or sulfasalazine, but lower than methotrexate. Toxicity however is severe, limiting its use given the low benefit-risk ratio compared to other antirheumatic agents.

Antirheumatic Agents↗
PubMed2000

Moderate-term, low-dose corticosteroids for rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a systematic review of low-dose corticosteroid efficacy in the moderate term for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). SEARCH STRATEGY: We conducted a search in MEDLINE from 1966 to 1998, using the keywords "corticosteroids" and "rheumatoid arthritis". We also handsearched all issues of Arthritis and Rheumatism and the Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology from their dates of first publication to 1994. Furthermore, we examined all Arthritis and Rheumatism abstracts over the 15 year period preceding 1994. References of all identified studies were searched for relevant trials. Authors of unpublished manuscripts were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were selected by two independent reviewers (LC, KS) using a set of predetermined criteria. Specifically, we required that trials be randomized or cross-over and report at least one of the following outcome measures in a quantitative manner: joint tenderness, joint swelling, grip strength, or erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). We also required that trials be of at least three months duration and use prednisone (or a comparable corticosteroid preparation) at a mean dosage of less than or equal to 15 mg/day. We included studies that used either placebo or active drug controls (i.e., comparative studies). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We compared the effectiveness of prednisone to placebo and/or active controls using a fixed effects model for continuous data. A chi square test for homogeneity was performed, and where heterogeneity existed a random effects model was used. We reported results for all available outcomes recommended by the Outcome Measures for Rheumatology Trials (OMERACT) group. These included the number of tender and swollen joints, pain, functional status and ESR. Grip strength was also evaluated. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were used for outcomes assessing the same concept with different scales (eg. swollen joint counts). MAIN RESULTS: Very few studies directly assessed the effectiveness of corticosteroids for RA treatment and many were of poor methodologic quality. Only seven of 34 studies identified by our search met criteria for inclusion. Our results indicated that corticosteroids were significantly more effective than placebo controls for four of six outcomes assessed [standardized mean difference for tender joints = -0.37 (95%CI: -0. 59, -0.14), swollen joints = -0.41 (-0.67, -0.16), pain = -0.43 (-0. 74, -0.12), and functional status = -0.57 (-0.92, -0.22)]. The results for grip strength and ESR were not significant [GS = +0.30 (-0.19, +0.80), weighted mean difference (WMD) for ESR = -7.03 (-18. 06, +4.01)]. The single trial that compared prednisone to aspirin indicated no statistically significant difference between these groups for joint tenderness (0.10 (-0.35, +0.55) and for ESR [0.00 (-11.09, +11.09]. Overall, the four outcomes assessed in the single trial that compared prednisone to chloroquine suggested that the effectiveness of these two agents is similar [SMD for joint tenderness = +0.23 (-0.30, +0.75), swollen joints = +0.43 (-0.11, +0. 96), functional status = -0.27 (-0.80, +0.26), and WMD for ESR = -16. 00 (-30.58, -1.42)]. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Based on the limited data available, moderate-term prednisone treatment of RA appears to be superior to placebo and comparable to treatment with aspirin or chloroquine in improving several common rheumatoid arthritis disease activity measures.

Arthritis, Rheumatoid↗