Author
Frank A. Wollheim
Other affiliations: University of Birmingham
Bio: Frank A. Wollheim is an academic researcher from Lund University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Rheumatoid arthritis & Arthritis. The author has an hindex of 37, co-authored 157 publications receiving 8423 citations. Previous affiliations of Frank A. Wollheim include University of Birmingham.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
Journal Article•
3,773 citations
Journal Article•
TL;DR: This preliminary severity scale will be useful for assessing disease severity status in individual patients both at one point in time and longitudinally and serve as a framework for developing a scleroderma disease activity index.
Abstract: Objective To develop and test a severity scale for individual organ involvements in systemic sclerosis (SSc, scleroderma). Methods An international study group completed the following tasks: (1) developed a glossary of terms including all pertinent variables for 9 potentially affected organ systems; (2) collected prospective data to determine the feasibility and practicality of each proposed variable; (3) revised the initial list of variables; (4) determined the association of each variable with mortality (a proxy for morbidity) using 579 patients in an existing comprehensive longitudinal scleroderma databank; (5) developed a severity grading scale for each organ system by discussion and consensus; and (6) externally validated the scale using an independent group of 680 patients from the same databank. Results Nine organ-specific severity scales were developed from 0 (no documented involvement) to 4 (endstage disease). The data required for scale completion are relatively easy and practical for all physicians to obtain. Conclusion This preliminary severity scale will be useful for assessing disease severity status in individual patients both at one point in time and longitudinally. The severity scale will assist in the design and conduct of clinical trials and the comparison of study populations with one another. The scale will serve as a framework for developing a scleroderma disease activity index.
414 citations
University of Paris1, Radboud University Nijmegen2, University of Basel3, Sapienza University of Rome4, Ghent University5, Federal University of Paraná6, University of Florence7, University of Giessen8, University of Genoa9, University of Zurich10, Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli11, University of Pécs12, University of California, Los Angeles13, Medical University of Białystok14, Charité15, Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy16, Charles University in Prague17, Istanbul University18, Complutense University of Madrid19, University of Geneva20, Medical University of Silesia21, University of Düsseldorf22, University of Ljubljana23, Marche Polytechnic University24, Medical University of Vienna25, Lund University26, University of Cologne27, University of Pisa28, University College London29, University of Tübingen30, James Cook University Hospital31, University of Coimbra32, University of Copenhagen33, University of Münster34, Russian Academy35, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy36, Hanyang University37, Thomas Jefferson University38, Utrecht University39, University of Connecticut40, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven41, University of Zagreb42, Heidelberg University43, University of Cagliari44, University of São Paulo45, University College Dublin46, University of Verona47, Wrocław Medical University48, Université catholique de Louvain49, Dresden University of Technology50
TL;DR: A core set of preliminary items considered as important for the very early diagnosis of systemic sclerosis were identified in a Delphi exercise among 110 experts in the field of SSc.
Abstract: Objective: To identify a core set of preliminary items considered as important for the very early diagnosis of systemic sclerosis (SSc). Methods: A list of items provided by European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Scleroderma Trial and Research(EUSTAR) centres were subjected to a Delphi exercise among 110 experts in the field of SSc. In round 1, experts were asked to choose the items they considered as the most important for the very early diagnosis of SSc. In round 2, experts were asked to reconsider the items accepted after the first stage. In round 3, the clinical relevance of selected items and their importance as measures that would lead to an early referral process were rated using appropriateness scores. Results: Physicians from 85 EUSTAR centres participated in the study and provided an initial list of 121 items. After three Delphi rounds, the steering committee, with input from external experts, collapsed the 121 items into three domains containing seven items, developed as follows: skin domain (puffy fingers/puffy swollen digits turning into sclerodactily);vascular domain (Raynaud's phenomenon, abnormal capillaroscopy with scleroderma pattern) and laboratory domain (antinuclear, anticentromere and antitopoisomerase-I antibodies). Finally, the whole assembly of EUSTAR centres ratified with a majority vote the results in a final face-to-face meeting. Conclusion: The three Delphi rounds allowed us to identify the items considered by experts as necessary for the very early diagnosis of SSc. The validation of these items to establish diagnostic criteria is currently ongoing in a prospective observational cohort.
334 citations
TL;DR: A panel of 12 RP experts from 9 different institutes and four different countries were assembled for a Delphi exercise to establish new diagnostic criteria for RP, which came to an agreement that the proposed criteria were "appropriate and accurate" for use by physicians to diagnose patients with RP.
179 citations
TL;DR: Cyclophosphamide may have a beneficial effect on pulmonary fibrosis in patients with SSc and elevated levels of acute-phase proteins.
Abstract: Objective. Pulmonary fibrosis is a common feature of systemic sclerosis (SSc) and a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Since alveolitis may be an essential step in the development of pulmonary fibrosis, we investigated the use of immunosuppressive drug therapy to improve pulmonary function in patients with SSc.
Methods. Eighteen patients with progressive pulmonary dysfunction, diminished vital capacity (VC), and/or decreased static lung compliance (Cst) were treated with cyclophosphamide and corticosteroids for 1 year. Eight patients had diffuse cutaneous SSc and 10 had limited cutaneous SSc. The median disease duration was 2.5 years (range 0.5–17 years).
Results. VC increased in 14 of 18 patients and the median VC rose from 74% to 80% of predicted. Cst improved in 8 of 12 patients and the median Cst increased from 59% to 66% of predicted. Pulmonary nonfibrotic opacities disappeared in 9 of 12 patients. The erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and serum concentrations of orosomucoid, C-reactive protein, and aminopropeptide type III collagen all improved. The patients were divided into 2 groups based on the presence or absence of elevations in acute-phase protein levels and ESR before therapy. Among the 12 patients with biochemical signs of inflammation, VC increased in 11, and Cst improved or was unchanged in 7 of the 8 who were tested. The median VC in this subgroup increased from 73% to 80% of predicted and the median Cst increased from 57% to 60% of predicted. In the group of 18 patients overall, the skin score decreased, while esophageal and renal function remained stable.
Conclusion. Cyclophosphamide may have a beneficial effect on pulmonary fibrosis in patients with SSc and elevated levels of acute-phase proteins. Controlled trials of cyclophosphamide in pulmonary SSc should be performed and should focus on such patients.
165 citations
Cited by
More filters
Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre1, University of Michigan2, Radboud University Nijmegen3, University of Toronto4, McGill University5, University of Basel6, University of Florence7, Auckland City Hospital8, University of Pittsburgh9, Charité10, University of California, Los Angeles11, University College London12, University of Zurich13, University of Paris14, Marche Polytechnic University15, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston16, Newcastle University17, University of Pécs18, Georgetown University19, Istanbul University20, Medical University of Białystok21, University of Giessen22, Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli23, University College Dublin24, Stanford University25, National Health Service26, University of Colorado Denver27, Medical College of Wisconsin28, University of Alabama at Birmingham29, University of Manchester30, Rutgers University31, Thomas Jefferson University32, Amgen33, University of Toledo34, Boston University35, Medical University of South Carolina36, University of Pennsylvania37, Northwestern University38
TL;DR: The ACR/EULAR classification criteria for SSc performed better than the 1980 ACR criteria and should allow for more patients to be classified correctly as having the disease.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The 1980 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria for systemic sclerosis (SSc) lack sensitivity for early SSc and limited cutaneous SSc. The present work, by a joint committee of the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), was undertaken for the purpose of developing new classification criteria for SSc. METHODS: Using consensus methods, 23 candidate items were arranged in a multicriteria additive point system with a threshold to classify cases as SSc. The classification system was reduced by clustering items and simplifying weights. The system was tested by 1) determining specificity and sensitivity in SSc cases and controls with scleroderma-like disorders, and 2) validating against the combined view of a group of experts on a set of cases with or without SSc. RESULTS: It was determined that skin thickening of the fingers extending proximal to the metacarpophalangeal joints is sufficient for the patient to be classified as having SSc; if that is not present, 7 additive items apply, with varying weights for each: skin thickening of the fingers, fingertip lesions, telangiectasia, abnormal nailfold capillaries, interstitial lung disease or pulmonary arterial hypertension, Raynaud's phenomenon, and SSc-related autoantibodies. Sensitivity and specificity in the validation sample were, respectively, 0.91 and 0.92 for the new classification criteria and 0.75 and 0.72 for the 1980 ACR classification criteria. All selected cases were classified in accordance with consensus-based expert opinion. All cases classified as SSc according to the 1980 ACR criteria were classified as SSc with the new criteria, and several additional cases were now considered to be SSc. CONCLUSION: The ACR/EULAR classification criteria for SSc performed better than the 1980 ACR criteria for SSc and should allow for more patients to be classified correctly as having the disease.
2,743 citations
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention1, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston2, University of Washington3, Boston University4, Boston Children's Hospital5, National Institutes of Health6, University of Maryland, Baltimore7, Mayo Clinic8, Brigham and Women's Hospital9, Georgetown University Medical Center10
TL;DR: Given the limitations of the data on which they are based, this report provides the best available prevalence estimates for arthritis and other rheumatic conditions overall, and for selected musculoskeletal disorders, in the US population.
Abstract: Objective
To provide a single source for the best available estimates of the national prevalence of arthritis in general and of selected musculoskeletal disorders (osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile rheumatoid arthritis, the spondylarthropathies, systemic lupus erythematosus, scleroderma, polymyalgia rheumatica/giant cell arteritis, gout, fibromyalgia, and low back pain).
Methods
The National Arthritis Data Workgroup reviewed data from available surveys, such as the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey series. For overall national estimates, we used surveys based on representative samples. Because data based on national population samples are unavailable for most specific musculoskeletal conditions, we derived data from various smaller survey samples from defined populations. Prevalence estimates from these surveys were linked to 1990 US Bureau of the Census population data to calculate national estimates. We also estimated the expected frequency of arthritis in the year 2020.
Results
Current national estimates are provided, with important caveats regarding their interpretation, for self-reported arthritis and selected conditions. An estimated 15% (40 million) of Americans had some form or arthritis in 1995. By the year 2020, an estimated 18.2% (59.4 million) will be affected.
Conclusion
Given the limitations of the data on which they are based, this report provides the best available prevalence estimates for arthritis and other rheumatic conditions overall, and for selected musculoskeletal disorders, in the US population.
2,667 citations
University of Alabama at Birmingham1, American University of Beirut2, Tufts Medical Center3, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center4, University of California, Los Angeles5, Washington University in St. Louis6, University of California, San Diego7, University of Nebraska Medical Center8, Mayo Clinic9, University of Minnesota10, NorthShore University HealthSystem11, Duke University12, American College of Rheumatology13
TL;DR: To develop a new evidence‐based, pharmacologic treatment guideline for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), a large number of patients with RA are referred to a single clinic for treatment with these medications.
Abstract: Objective
To develop a new evidence-based, pharmacologic treatment guideline for rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
Methods
We conducted systematic reviews to synthesize the evidence for the benefits and harms of various treatment options. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to rate the quality of evidence. We employed a group consensus process to grade the strength of recommendations (either strong or conditional). A strong recommendation indicates that clinicians are certain that the benefits of an intervention far outweigh the harms (or vice versa). A conditional recommendation denotes uncertainty over the balance of benefits and harms and/or more significant variability in patient values and preferences.
Results
The guideline covers the use of traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biologic agents, tofacitinib, and glucocorticoids in early (<6 months) and established (≥6 months) RA. In addition, it provides recommendations on using a treat-to-target approach, tapering and discontinuing medications, and the use of biologic agents and DMARDs in patients with hepatitis, congestive heart failure, malignancy, and serious infections. The guideline addresses the use of vaccines in patients starting/receiving DMARDs or biologic agents, screening for tuberculosis in patients starting/receiving biologic agents or tofacitinib, and laboratory monitoring for traditional DMARDs. The guideline includes 74 recommendations: 23% are strong and 77% are conditional.
Conclusion
This RA guideline should serve as a tool for clinicians and patients (our two target audiences) for pharmacologic treatment decisions in commonly encountered clinical situations. These recommendations are not prescriptive, and the treatment decisions should be made by physicians and patients through a shared decision-making process taking into account patients’ values, preferences, and comorbidities. These recommendations should not be used to limit or deny access to therapies.
2,083 citations
Radboud University Nijmegen1, University of Michigan2, University of Toronto3, McGill University4, University of Basel5, University of Florence6, Auckland City Hospital7, University of Pittsburgh8, Complutense University of Madrid9, Charité10, University of California, Los Angeles11, University College London12, University of Zurich13, University of Paris14, Marche Polytechnic University15, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston16, Newcastle University17, University of Pécs18, Georgetown University19, Istanbul University20, Medical University of Białystok21, University of Giessen22, Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli23, University College Dublin24, Stanford University25, University of Colorado Denver26, Amgen27, Medical College of Wisconsin28, University of Alabama at Birmingham29, National Health Service30, University of Manchester31, Rutgers University32, Thomas Jefferson University33, University of Toledo34, University of Pennsylvania35, Boston University36, Medical University of South Carolina37, Northwestern University38, University of Western Ontario39
TL;DR: The ACR/EULAR classification criteria for SSc performed better than the 1980 ACR criteria and should allow for more patients to be classified correctly as having the disease.
Abstract: Objective The 1980 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria for systemic sclerosis (SSc) lack sensitivity for early SSc and limited cutaneous SSc. The present work, by a joint committee of the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), was undertaken for the purpose of developing new classification criteria for SSc. Methods Using consensus methods, 23 candidate items were arranged in a multicriteria additive point system with a threshold to classify cases as SSc. The classification system was reduced by clustering items and simplifying weights. The system was tested by (1) determining specificity and sensitivity in SSc cases and controls with scleroderma-like disorders, and (2) validating against the combined view of a group of experts on a set of cases with or without SSc. Results It was determined that skin thickening of the fingers extending proximal to the metacarpophalangeal joints is sufficient for the patient to be classified as having SSc; if that is not present, seven additive items apply, with varying weights for each: skin thickening of the fingers, fingertip lesions, telangiectasia, abnormal nailfold capillaries, interstitial lung disease or pulmonary arterial hypertension, Raynaud9s phenomenon, and SSc-related autoantibodies. Sensitivity and specificity in the validation sample were, respectively, 0.91 and 0.92 for the new classification criteria and 0.75 and 0.72 for the 1980 ACR classification criteria. All selected cases were classified in accordance with consensus-based expert opinion. All cases classified as SSc according to the 1980 ACR criteria were classified as SSc with the new criteria, and several additional cases were now considered to be SSc. Conclusions The ACR/EULAR classification criteria for SSc performed better than the 1980 ACR criteria for SSc and should allow for more patients to be classified correctly as having the disease.
1,899 citations
TL;DR: The existence of many new and encouraging biological approaches to cartilage repair justifies the future investment of time and money in this research area, particularly given the extremely high socio-economic importance of such therapeutic strategies in the prevention and treatment of these common joint diseases and traumas.
1,868 citations