EULAR Recommendations for Women's Health and the Management of Family Planning, Assisted Reproduction, Pregnancy and Menopause in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and/or Antiphospholipid Syndrome

OBJECTIVES: Develop recommendations for women's health issues and family planning in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and/or antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). METHODS: Systematic review of evidence followed by modified Delphi method to compile questions, elicit expert opinions and reach consensus. RESULTS: Family planning should be discussed as early as possible after diagnosis. Most women can have successful pregnancies and measures can be taken to reduce the risks of adverse maternal or fetal outcomes. Risk stratification includes disease activity, autoantibody profile, previous vascular and pregnancy morbidity, hypertension and the use of drugs (emphasis on benefits from hydroxychloroquine and antiplatelets/anticoagulants). Hormonal contraception and menopause replacement therapy can be used in patients with stable/inactive disease and low risk of thrombosis. Fertility preservation with gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues should be considered prior to the use of alkylating agents. Assisted reproduction techniques can be safely used in patients with stable/inactive disease; patients with positive antiphospholipid antibodies/APS should receive anticoagulation and/or low-dose aspirin. Assessment of disease activity, renal function and serological markers is important for diagnosing disease flares and monitoring for obstetrical adverse outcomes. Fetal monitoring includes Doppler ultrasonography and fetal biometry, particularly in the third trimester, to screen for placental insufficiency and small for gestational age fetuses. Screening for gynaecological malignancies is similar to the general population, with increased vigilance for cervical premalignant lesions if exposed to immunosuppressive drugs. Human papillomavirus immunisation can be used in women with stable/inactive disease. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations for women's health issues in SLE and/or APS were developed using an evidence-based approach followed by expert consensus.

Phototherapy in Childhood: a 17-Year Retrospective Study Regarding Effectiveness and Safety

Introduction: Skin diseases in paediatric age are often distressing conditions with significant impact in children’s psychosocial development. Additionally, systemic therapeutic options are often limited in childhood, due to its potential toxicity in this vulnerable group. Phototherapy is therefore an endorsed option for photo-responsive dermatological conditions. Objective and Methods:This observational retrospective study aims to access efficacy and safety of Phototherapy in our paediatric population. Relevant clinical data from 1996 to present concerning patients aged 18 years or less was collected. Results: 78 patients were included, of which64,1%was female. Mean age was 12,9 years (range 2-18). Distribution according to diagnosis was:47,4%psoriasis, 34,6% alopecia areata, 9,0% vitiligo, 9,0% other diagnosis. Mean number of cycles was 1,5 (range 1-7), with an average of 16,3 treatments per cycle and mean cumulative dose 134 J/cm2. 70,5% was treated with one single cycle. Topic and systemic PUVA were the first choice in 37,2% and 39,7%, respectively, while UVB TL01 and broadband UVB were used in 11,5% each. On the first cycle 67,5% improved, 14,3% showed no sustained clinical response and 19,5% were lost to follow-up. Psoriasis patients had the best response rates (81,8%), followed by alopecia areata (59,3%). Side effects occurred in 21%, being erythema the most common (12%). None led to therapeutic interruption. Discussion: Phototherapy is a safe and effective option in childhood, yet the withdraw rate might be an important limitation.

The Oncological and Functional Risks of the Organ Preservation Experimental Treatment Approach

We increasingly face conservative surgery for rectal cancer and even the so called ‘wait and see’ approach, as far as 10–20% patients can reach a complete pathological response at the time of surgery. But what can we say to our patients about risks? Standard surgery with mesorectal excision gives a <2% local recurrence with a post operative death rate of 2–8% (may reach 30% at 6 months in those over 85), but low AR has some deterioration in bowel function and in low cancer a permanent stoma may be required. Also a long-term impact on urinary and sexual function is possible. Distant metastasis rate seem to be identical in the standard and conservative approach. It is difficult to evaluate conservative approach because a not clear standardization of surgery for low rectal cancer. Rullier et al tried to clarify, and they found identical results for recurrence (5–9%), disease free survival (70%) at 5y for coloanal anastomosis and intersphinteric resection. Other series have found local recurrence higher than with standard approach and functional results may be worse and, in some situations, salvage therapy is compromised or has more complications. In this context, functional outcomes are very important but most studies are incomplete in measuring bowel function in the context of conservative approach. In 2005 Temple et al made a survey of 122/184 patient after sphinter preserving surgery and found a 96.9% of incomplete evacuation, 94.4% clustering, 93.2% food affecting frequency, 91.8% gas incontinence and proposed a systematic evaluation with a specific questionnaire. In which concerns ‘Wait and see’ approach for complete clinical responders, it was first advocated by Habr Gama for tumors up to 7cm, with a low locoregional failure of 4.6%, 5y overall survival 96%, 72% for disease free survival; one fifth of patients failed in the first year; a Dutch trial had identical results but others had worse recurrence rates; in other series 25% of patients could not be salvaged even with APR; 30% have subsequent metastatic disease what seems equal for ‘wait and see’ and operated patients. In a recent review Glynne Jones considers that all the evaluated ‘wait and see’ studies are heterogeneous in staging, inclusion criteria, design and follow up after chemoradiation and that there is the suggestion that patients who progress while under observation fare worse than those resected. He proposes long-term observational studies with more uniform inclusion criteria. We are now facing a moment where we may be more aggressive in early cancer and neoadjuvant treatment to be more conservative in the subsequent treatment but we need a better stratification of patients, better evaluation of results and more clear prognostic markers.

Mental Health and Quality of Life in Alcoholic Liver Disease Patients After Liver Transplantation: a Prospective Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE: Alcoholic liver disease (ALD) is one of the most important indications for liver transplantation. Discordant conclusions have been found concerning quality of life and mental health after transplantation in this particular group. The aim of this work was to investigate improvements in mental health and quality of life among transplanted patients for ALD. METHODS: We studied 45 consecutive transplant candidates with ALD, attending the outpatient clinics. Among these patients we transplanted 24 with the control candidates remaining in wait for transplantation. RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in all mental health and quality of life dimensions among the transplanted ALD group. We also observed a favorable evolution of coping mechanisms (CM) in this group. CONCLUSION: There is a favorable adjustment of ALD patients after transplantation as shown in CM evolution, which might explain the improved mental health and quality-of-life dimensions.

Atorvastatin versus Bezafibrate in Mixed Hyperlipidaemia : Randomised Clinical Trial of Efficacy and Safety (the ATOMIX Study)

OBJECTIVE: Combined hyperlipidaemia is a common and highly atherogenic lipid phenotype with multiple lipoprotein abnormalities that are difficult to normalise with single-drug therapy. The ATOMIX multicentre, controlled clinical trial compared the efficacy and safety of atorvastatin and bezafibrate in patients with diet-resistant combined hyperlipidaemia. PATIENTS AND STUDY DESIGN: Following a 6-week placebo run-in period, 138 patients received atorvastatin 10mg or bezafibrate 400mg once daily in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. To meet predefined low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) target levels, atorvastatin dosages were increased to 20mg or 40mg once daily after 8 and 16 weeks, respectively. RESULTS: After 52 weeks, atorvastatin achieved greater reductions in LDL-C than bezafibrate (percentage decrease 35 vs 5; p < 0.0001), while bezafibrate achieved greater reductions in triglyceride than atorvastatin (percentage decrease 33 vs 21; p < 0.05) and greater increases in high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) [percentage increase 28 vs 17; p < 0.01 ]. Target LDL-C levels (according to global risk) were attained in 62% of atorvastatin recipients and 6% of bezafibrate recipients, and triglyceride levels <200 mg/dL were achieved in 52% and 60% of patients, respectively. In patients with normal baseline HDL-C, bezafibrate was superior to atorvastatin for raising HDL-C, while in those with baseline HDL-C <35 mg/dL, the two drugs raised HDL-C to a similar extent after adjustment for baseline values. Both drugs were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: The results show that atorvastatin has an overall better efficacy than bezafibrate in concomitantly reaching LDL-C and triglyceride target levels in combined hyperlipidaemia, thus supporting its use as monotherapy in patients with this lipid phenotype.

Long-Term Lamivudine Treatment of Children with Chronic Hepatitis B: Durability of Therapeutic Responses and Safety

Lamivudine has been demonstrated safe and efficacious in the short term in a large cohort of children with chronic hepatitis B (CHB), but optimal duration of treatment has not been elucidated and limited data on the safety of long-term lamivudine administration have been reported. In addition, the durability of favourable therapeutic outcomes after lamivudine therapy in children has not been well characterized. The aim of this study was to examine the safety of lamivudine and the durability of clinical responses in a group of children who received up to 3 years of treatment for CHB. One hundred and fifty-one children from centres in nine countries who had previously received lamivudine in a large prospective trial were enrolled. During the first year, children had been randomized to either lamivudine or placebo treatment. Subsequently, in a separate extension study, those who remained hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) positive were given lamivudine for up to 2 years and those who were HBeAg negative were observed for additional 2 years. Results of these studies have been previously reported. In this study, these children were followed for 2 additional years. Data gathered from medical record review included weight, height, signs and symptoms of hepatitis, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels, serologic markers, hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA levels and serious adverse events (SAEs). Other pharmacological treatments for CHB were allowed according to the practices of individual investigators and were documented. Subjects were divided into two groups for analysis, those who had achieved virological response (VR), defined as HBeAg negative and undetectable HBV DNA by the bDNA assay by the end of the extension study at 3 years, and those who had not. In those who had achieved VR by the end of the extension study, long-term durability of HBeAg seroconversion was 82% and >90% in those who had received lamivudine for 52 weeks and at least 2 years respectively. This compares to 75% for those who had achieved seroconversion after placebo. In those who had not achieved VR by the end of the extension study, an additional 11% did so by the end of the study; they had all received lamivudine in the previous trial, and none had received further treatment during the study. Eight children lost hepatitis B surface antigen during the study and all had received lamivudine at some point during the previous trials. Evaluation of safety data revealed no SAEs related to lamivudine. There was no effect of treatment on weight or height z scores. Clinically benign ALT flares (>10 times normal) were seen in 2% of children. Favourable outcomes from lamivudine treatment of CHB in children are maintained for at least several years after completion of treatment. Up to 3 years of lamivudine treatment is safe in children.