RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop recommendations for the management of methotrexate (MTX) when considering the combination with biological (b) or targeted synthetic (ts) disease modifying drugs (DMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Eleven experts on RA were selected. Two coordinators formulated 13 questions about the combination therapy of MTX with bDMARDs or tsDMARDs. A systematic review was conducted to answer the questions. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were established as well as the search strategies (Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched up to January 2019). Two reviewers selected the articles and collected data. Simultaneously, EULAR and ACR meeting abstracts were evaluated. Based on this evidence, the coordinators proposed preliminary recommendations that the experts discussed and voted in a nominal group meeting. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation was established using the Oxford Center for Evidence Based Medicine and the level of agreement with a Delphi. Agreement was established if at least 80% of the experts voted 'yes' (yes/no). RESULTS: The systematic review retrieved 513 citations of which 61 were finally included. A total of 10 recommendations were generated, voted and accepted. The level of agreement was very high in all of them and it was achieved in the first Delphi round. Final recommendations cover aspects such as the optimal MTX dosage, tapering strategy or patients' risk management. CONCLUSIONS: This document is intended to help clinicians solve usual clinical questions and facilitate decision making when treating RA patients with MTX in combination with bDMARDs or tsDMARDs.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop recommendations for the management of methotrexate (MTX) when considering the combination with biological (b) or targeted synthetic (ts) disease modifying drugs (DMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Eleven experts on RA were selected. Two coordinators formulated 13 questions about the combination therapy of MTX with bDMARDs or tsDMARDs. A systematic review was conducted to answer the questions. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were established as well as the search strategies (Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched up to January 2019). Two reviewers selected the articles and collected data. Simultaneously, EULAR and ACR meeting abstracts were evaluated. Based on this evidence, the coordinators proposed preliminary recommendations that the experts discussed and voted in a nominal group meeting. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation was established using the Oxford Center for Evidence Based Medicine and the level of agreement with a Delphi. Agreement was established if at least 80% of the experts voted 'yes' (yes/no). RESULTS: The systematic review retrieved 513 citations of which 61 were finally included. A total of 10 recommendations were generated, voted and accepted. The level of agreement was very high in all of them and it was achieved in the first Delphi round. Final recommendations cover aspects such as the optimal MTX dosage, tapering strategy or patients' risk management. CONCLUSIONS: This document is intended to help clinicians solve usual clinical questions and facilitate decision making when treating RA patients with MTX in combination with bDMARDs or tsDMARDs.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Triple antithrombotic therapy (TT) is recommended for patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, there is a lack of comparative data in a real-world clinical setting between non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) and vitamin K antagonists (VKA). The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of TT with NOAC or VKA after PCI in patients with AF at 1-year of follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was an observational retrospective study in 2 tertiary care hospitals during 2013-2016. Patients with indication for anticoagulation due to AF from an initial registry of 5,269 patients undergoing PCI were identified. Safety primary endpoint was the occurrence of major bleeding events as defined by Bleeding Academic Consortium (BARC ≥ 3). The primary efficacy endpoint was defined as major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). RESULTS: A total of 187 consecutive patients on TT were identified: 45.4% of were discharged on NOAC and 54.6% on VKA. Patients who received VKA presented more comorbidities and had a higher bleeding risk than those who received NOACs. Major bleeding events occurred in 17 patients (9%), with a higher rate in the VKA group (3.5% vs. 13% confidence interval, 0.19-0.86, P = 0.02). There were no differences in the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events, stroke or net clinical benefit. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study, patients with AF undergoing PCI treated on NOAC-based TT showed lower bleeding rates than those on VKA, with a lower rate of major bleeding events, while efficacy was similar between groups.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Limited data exists on the impact of sex on outcomes in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We explored the impact of sex on ischemic and bleeding events in these patients within 1-year. METHODS: A prospective register included 1021 patients with NVAF undergoing PCI and 253 (24.8%) were women. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke or systemic embolism (SSE). The secondary end-point was major bleeding events defined as a Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC ≥ 3a). RESULTS: Women were older (76.8 ±â€¯7.7 vs 71.8 ±â€¯9.1 years, p < 0.0001), and presented more often CHA2DS2-VASc ≥ 2 (adjusted HR 1.15; 95%CI 1.13-1.18, p < 0.0001) and HAS-BLED ≥ 3 (adjusted HR 1.12; 95%CI 1.10-1.14, p < 0.0001) than men. The use of oral anticoagulant at discharge was similar in both sexes (55.9% vs 56.5%, p = 0.45). The time in therapeutic range (TTR ≥ 65%) was lower in women than in men (35.6 ±â€¯24.6% vs 48.9 ±â€¯27.2%, p = 0.002). The incidence of adverse events was higher in women (39.9% vs 28.9%, p = 0.01). After adjusting for confounder variables, cardiovascular death or SSE rate (16.6% vs 10.4%; adjusted HR 1.58; 95%CI 1.07-2.31; p = 0.01) and major bleeding (11.5% vs 5.0%; adjusted HR 2.17; 95%CI 1.31-3.59; p = 0.003) were higher in women, as was cardiovascular death (adjusted HR 1.71; 95%CI, 1.18-2.46, p = 0.004). TTR was negatively correlated with any bleeding event in women (r = -0.41; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Female with NVAF undergoing PCI showed a lower TTR than men and TTR was associated with bleeding events. Female sex was an independent risk factor for cardiovascular death and major bleeding.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Blood glucose meters are reliable devices for data collection, providing electronic logs of historical data easier to interpret than handwritten logbooks. Automated tools to analyze these data are necessary to facilitate glucose pattern detection and support treatment adjustment. These tools emerge in a broad variety in a more or less nonevaluated manner. The aim of this study was to compare eDetecta, a new automated pattern detection tool, to nonautomated pattern analysis in terms of time investment, data interpretation, and clinical utility, with the overarching goal to identify early in development and implementation of tool areas of improvement and potential safety risks. METHODS: Multicenter web-based evaluation in which 37 endocrinologists were asked to assess glycemic patterns of 4 real reports (2 continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion [CSII] and 2 multiple daily injection [MDI]). Endocrinologist and eDetecta analyses were compared on time spent to analyze each report and agreement on the presence or absence of defined patterns. RESULTS: eDetecta module markedly reduced the time taken to analyze each case on the basis of the emminens eConecta reports (CSII: 18 min; MDI: 12.5), compared to the automatic eDetecta analysis. Agreement between endocrinologists and eDetecta varied depending on the patterns, with high level of agreement in patterns of glycemic variability. Further analysis of low level of agreement led to identifying areas where algorithms used could be improved to optimize trend pattern identification. CONCLUSION: eDetecta was a useful tool for glycemic pattern detection, helping clinicians to reduce time required to review emminens eConecta glycemic reports. No safety risks were identified during the study.

Asunto(s)