METHOD: Blood samples were obtained from 20 healthy blood donors, 30 RA patients who presented with anaemia and 30 patients who had pure iron deficiency anaemia (IDA). The samples were analysed for full blood count, iron, ferritin, transferrin, soluble transferrin receptor and prohepcidin.
RESULTS: The mean prohepcidin level in the control subjects was 256 microg/L. The prohepcidin level was significantly lower in IDA patients (100 microg/L; p < 0.0001) but not significantly different from that of control in RA patients (250 microg/L; p > 0.05). Higher serum soluble transferrin receptor (sTfR) levels were observed in IDA (p < 0.0001) but not in RA compared with that of control (p > 0.05). RA patients were divided into iron depleted and iron repleted subgroups based on the ferritin level. Prohepcidin in the iron depleted group was significantly lower than the iron repleted group and the control (p < 0.0001) and higher levels were observed in the iron repleted group (p < 0.01). sTfR levels in the iron depleted group were significantly higher than the control and the iron repleted patients (p < 0.001). In the iron repleted group, sTfR level was not statistically different from that of control (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Serum prohepcidin is clearly reduced in uncomplicated iron deficiency anaemia. The reduced prohepcidin levels in the iron depleted RA patients suggests that there may be conflicting signals regulating hepcidin production in RA patients. In RA patients who have reduced hepcidin in the iron depleted group (ferritin <60 microg/L) where sTfR levels are increased suggests that these patients are iron deficient. Further studies with a larger cohort of patients are required to substantiate this point.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search of relevant literature from 2014 to 2016 concerning targeted therapies in RA was conducted. The RA Update Working Group evaluated the evidence and proposed updated recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach, to describe the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Recommendations were finalized through consensus using the Delphi technique.
RESULTS: This update provides 16 RA treatment recommendations based on current best evidence and expert clinical opinion. Recommendations 1-3 deal with the use of conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. The next three recommendations (4-6) cover the need for screening and management of infections and comorbid conditions prior to starting targeted therapy, while the following seven recommendations focus on use of these agents. We address choice of targeted therapy, switch, tapering and discontinuation. The last three recommendations elaborate on targeted therapy for RA in special situations such as pregnancy, cancer, and major surgery.
CONCLUSION: Rheumatoid arthritis remains a significant health problem in the Asia-Pacific region. Patients with RA can benefit from the availability of effective targeted therapies, and these updated recommendations provide clinicians with guidance on their use.
METHOD: One hundred RA patients and 50 healthy controls, sex- and age-matched, were recruited. Disease Activity Score of 28 joints and Health Assessment Questionnaire scores were assessed. Baseline serum 25(OH)D3 and IL-6 were measured in all subjects. RA patients who were vitamin D deficient were given loading doses of vitamin D3 and repeated assessments were done.
RESULTS: Vitamin D deficiency (<50 nmol/L) was found in 63% of RA patients and 76% of healthy controls. Chinese RA patients and healthy controls had significantly more sufficient 25(OH)D3 levels compared to Malays and Indians (P
METHODS: A novel research instrument known as the rheumatoid arthritis knowledge assessment scale (RAKAS) which consisted of 13 items, was formulated by a rheumatology panel and used for this study. This study was conducted in rheumatology clinics of three tertiary care hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan. The study was conducted in March-April 2018. Patients were recruited using a randomized computer-generated list of appointments. Sample size was calculated based on item-to-respondent ratio of 1:15. The validities, factor structure, sensitivity, reliability and internal consistency of RAKAS were assessed. The study was approved by the institutional Ethics Committee.
RESULTS: A total of 263 patients responded to the study. Content validity was 0.93 and response rate was 89.6%. Factor analysis revealed a 3-factor structure. Fit indices, namely normed fit index (NFI), Tucker Lewis index (TLI), comparative fit index (CFI) and root mean square of error approximation (RMSEA) were calculated with satisfactory results, that is, NFI, TLI and CFI > 0.9, and RMSEA 19 and difficulty index <0.95. Sensitivity and specificity of RAKAS were above 90%. The tool established construct and known group validities.
CONCLUSION: A novel tool to document disease knowledge in patients with RA was formulated and validated.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirtyfour patients with rheumatoid arthritis and 34 non-rheumatoid arthritis individuals were included in this cross-sectional study. Anti-RA33 antibody and rheumatoid factor were performed on all samples.
RESULTS: The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value for anti-RA33 antibody and rheumatoid factor were 41.1%, 97.1%, 93.3%, 62.3% and 64.7%, 79.4%, 75.9%, 69.2% respectively. The overall sensitivity and specificity if either anti-RA33 antibody or rheumatoid factor are positive were 79.4% and 76.47% respectively.
CONCLUSION: Anti-RA33 antibody showed good specificity and positive predictive value and could be considered as a potential serological marker for rheumatoid arthritis diagnosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comparative cross-sectional study involving 98 RA patients was conducted at Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, Malaysia. Clinical oral examination was carried out to determine the CP status of RA patients. RF, ACPA and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) were measured, and the 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS-28) was assessed.
RESULTS: Forty-five patients (45.9%) were found to have CP (95% CI: 0.36-0.56). No significant difference was observed in the prevalence of positive RF (p=0.989) or ACPA (p=0.431) in CP and non-CP RA patients. There was also no significant association between active RA disease (DAS-28 score ≥3.2) and RF positivity in CP (p=0.927) and non-CP (p=0.431) RA patients as well as ACPA positivity in CP (p=0.780) and non-CP (p=0.611) RA patients.
CONCLUSION: In our cohort of RA patients, we did not find significant associations between elevated RF, ACPA, or active RA disease with the presence of CP. There were also no significant associations between elevated RF or ACPA with active RA disease.
METHODS: A prospective 1-year study was conducted in rheumatology clinics of tertiary care hospitals of Karachi, Pakistan. Cost-of-illness methodology was used and all patient data related to costs of rheumatologist visits, physical therapy sessions, medications, assistive devices and laboratory investigations were obtained directly in printed hardcopies from patient electronic databases using their medical record numbers. Transportation cost was calculated from patient-reported log books. Data were analyzed through IBM SPSS version 23. Patients were asked to sign a written consent and the study was ethically approved.
RESULTS: The mean age of patients (N = 358) was 48 years. Most patients (73.7%) were female, married (86%) and had basic education (71.8%). Average cost of rheumatologist visits was PKR 11 510.61 (USD: 72.05) while it was PKR 66 947.37 (USD: 419.07) for physical therapy sessions. On average, medicines and medical devices costs were estimated at PKR 10 104.23 (USD: 63.25) and PKR 7848.48 (USD: 49.13) respectively. Cost attributed to diagnostic and laboratory charges was PKR 1962.12 (USD: 12.28) and travel expense was PKR 6541 (USD: 40.95). The direct expenditure associated with managing RA was PKR 37 558 (USD: 235.1). All costs were reported per annum.
CONCLUSION: Patient with RA in Pakistan pay a considerable amount of their income for managing their condition. Most patients have no provision for insurance which is a need considering the nature of the disease and associated productivity loss that would significantly lower income as the disease progresses.