Charité

About: Charité is a healthcare organization based out in Berlin, Germany. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Transplantation. The organization has 30624 authors who have published 64507 publications receiving 2437322 citations. The organization is also known as: Charite & Charité – University Medicine Berlin.

European League Against Rheumatism recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies

Abstract: Background Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a clinically heterogeneous disease. Clear consensual treatment guidance focused on the musculoskeletal manifestations of PsA would be advantageous. The authors present European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for the treatment of PsA with systemic or local (non-topical) symptomatic and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD). Methods The recommendations are based on evidence from systematic literature reviews performed for non-steroidal anti-infl ammatory drugs (NSAID), glucocorticoids, synthetic DMARD and biological DMARD. This evidence was discussed, summarised and recommendations were formulated by a task force comprising 35 representatives, and providing levels of evidence, strength of recommendations and levels of agreement. Results Ten recommendations were developed for treatment from NSAID through synthetic DMARD to biological agents, accounting for articular and extraarticular manifestations of PsA. Five overarching principles and a research agenda were defi ned. Conclusion These recommendations are intended to provide rheumatologists, patients and other stakeholders with a consensus on the pharmacological treatment of PsA and strategies to reach optimal outcomes, based on combining evidence and expert opinion. The research agenda informs directions within EULAR and other communities interested in PsA.

Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis : results of a randomised placebo-controlled trial (ABILITY-1)

Abstract: Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA). Methods Patients fulfilled Assessment of Spondyloarthritis international Society (ASAS) criteria for axial spondyloarthritis, had a Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) score of ≥ 4, total back pain score of ≥ 4 (10 cm visual analogue scale) and inadequate response, intolerance or contraindication to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); patients fulfilling modified New York criteria for ankylosing spondylitis were excluded. Patients were randomised to adalimumab (N=91) or placebo (N=94). The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving ASAS40 at week 12. Efficacy assessments included BASDAI and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS). MRI was performed at baseline and week 12 and scored using the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) index. Results Significantly more patients in the adalimumab group achieved ASAS40 at week 12 compared with patients in the placebo group (36% vs 15%, p<0.001). Significant clinical improvements based on other ASAS responses, ASDAS and BASDAI were also detected at week 12 with adalimumab treatment, as were improvements in quality of life measures. Inflammation in the spine and sacroiliac joints on MRI significantly decreased after 12 weeks of adalimumab treatment. Shorter disease duration, younger age, elevated baseline C-reactive protein or higher SPARCC MRI sacroiliac joint scores were associated with better week 12 responses to adalimumab. The safety profile was consistent with what is known for adalimumab in ankylosing spondylitis and other diseases. Conclusions In patients with nr-axSpA, adalimumab treatment resulted in effective control of disease activity, decreased inflammation and improved quality of life compared with placebo. Results from ABILITY-1 suggest that adalimumab has a positive benefit–risk profile in active nr-axSpA patients with inadequate response to NSAIDs.

EFNS guideline on the treatment of cerebral venous and sinus thrombosis in adult patients

Abstract: Background: Cerebral venous and sinus thrombosis (CVST) is a rather rare disease which accounts for <1% of all strokes. Diagnosis is still frequently overlooked or delayed as a result of the wide spectrum of clinical symptoms and the often subacute or lingering onset. Current therapeutic measures which are used in clinical practice include the use of anticoagulants such as dose-adjusted intravenous heparin or body weight-adjusted subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), the use of thrombolysis and symptomatic therapy including control of seizures and elevated intracranial pressure. Methods: We searched MEDLINE (National Library of Medicine), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Cochrane Library to review the strength of evidence to support these interventions and the preparation of recommendations on the therapy of CVST based on the best available evidence. Review articles and book chapters were also included. Recommendations were reached by consensus. Where there was a lack of evidence but consensus was clear we stated our opinion as good practice points. Results and conclusions: Patients with CVST without contraindications for anticoagulation (AC) should be treated either with body weight-adjusted subcutaneous LMWH or with dose-adjusted intravenous heparin (level B recommendation). Concomitant intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) related to CVST is not a contraindication for heparin therapy. The optimal duration of oral anticoagulant therapy after the acute phase is unclear. Oral AC may be given for 3 months if CVST was secondary to a transient risk factor, for 6–12 months in patients with idiopathic CVST and in those with ‘‘mild’’ thrombophilia, such as heterozygous factor V Leiden or prothrombin G20210A mutation and high plasma levels of factor VIII. Indefinite AC should be considered in patients with recurrent episodes of CVST and in those with one episode of CVST andsevere thrombophilia, such as antithrombin, protein C or protein S deficiency, homozygous factor V Leiden or prothrombin G20210A mutation, antiphospholipid antibodies and combined abnormalities (good practice point). There is insufficient evidence to support the use of either systemic or local thrombolysis in patients with CVST. If patients deteriorate despite adequate AC and other causes of deterioration have been ruled out, thrombolysis may be a therapeutic option in selected cases, possibly in those without large ICH and threatening herniation (good practice point). There are no controlled data about the risks and benefits of certain therapeutic measures to reduce an elevated intracranial pressure (with brain displacement) in patients with severe CVST. However, in severe cases with impending herniation craniectomy can be used as a life-saving intervention (good practice point).

Future Biomarkers for Detection of Ischemia and Risk Stratification in Acute Coronary Syndrome

Abstract: Background: Evaluation of patients who present to the hospital with a complaint of chest pain or other signs or symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is time-consuming, expensive, and problematic. Recent investigations have indicated that increases in biomarkers upstream from biomarkers of necrosis (cardiac troponins I and T), such as inflammatory cytokines, cellular adhesion molecules, acute-phase reactants, plaque destabilization and rupture biomarkers, biomarkers of ischemia, and biomarkers of myocardial stretch may provide earlier assessment of overall patient risk and aid in identifying patients with higher risk of an adverse event. Approach and Content: The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the pathophysiology and clinical and analytical characteristics of several biomarkers that may have potential clinical utility to identify ACS patients. These biomarkers (myeloperoxidase, metalloproteinase-9, soluble CD40 ligand, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A, choline, ischemia-modified albumin, unbound free fatty acids, glycogen phosphorylase isoenzyme BB, and placental growth factor) have demonstrated promise and need to be more thoroughly evaluated for commercial development for implementation into routine clinical and laboratory practice. Summary: Specifications that have been addressed for cardiac troponins and natriuretic peptides will need to be addressed with the same scrutiny for the biomarkers discussed in this review. They include validating analytical imprecision and detection limits, calibrator characterization, assay specificity and standardization, preanalytical issues, and appropriate reference interval studies. Crossing boundaries from research to clinical application will require replication in multiple settings and experimental evidence supporting a pathophysiologic role and, ideally, interventional trials demonstrating that monitoring single or multiple biomarkers improves outcomes.

Comparison of Early Intervention Services vs Treatment as Usual for Early-Phase Psychosis: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Meta-regression

Abstract: Importance The value of early intervention in psychosis and allocation of public resources has long been debated because outcomes in people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders have remained suboptimal. Objective To compare early intervention services (EIS) with treatment as usual (TAU) for early-phase psychosis. Data Sources Systematic literature search of PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov without language restrictions through June 6, 2017. Study Selection Randomized trials comparing EIS vs TAU in first-episode psychosis or early-phase schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Data Extraction and Synthesis This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Three independent investigators extracted data for a random-effects meta-analysis and prespecified subgroup and meta-regression analyses. Main Outcomes and Measures The coprimary outcomes were all-cause treatment discontinuation and at least 1 psychiatric hospitalization during the treatment period. Results Across 10 randomized clinical trials (mean [SD] trial duration, 16.2 [7.4] months; range, 9-24 months) among 2176 patients (mean [SD] age, 27.5 [4.6] years; 1355 [62.3%] male), EIS was associated with better outcomes than TAU at the end of treatment for all 13 meta-analyzable outcomes. These outcomes included the following: all-cause treatment discontinuation (risk ratio [RR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.80; P P = .003), involvement in school or work (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.03-1.24; P = .01), total symptom severity (standardized mean difference [SMD], −0.32; 95% CI, −0.47 to −0.17; P P P Conclusions and Relevance In early-phase psychosis, EIS are superior to TAU across all meta-analyzable outcomes. These results support the need for funding and use of EIS in patients with early-phase psychosis.