The overprescribing of opioid pain medications has given way to an overprescribing of anxiolytics, sedatives, and stimulants. The results are unsafe and dangerous.

When we address this problem with patients, some become immediately defensive, making it difficult to modify treatment regimens. It’s almost as if people believe that they have a “right” to their medications and nobody should dare take them away. Even when I think the interaction goes relatively smoothly, the outcome usually shows otherwise.

I will decrease gabapentin from 3,200 mg per day and they will come back with cyclobenzaprine from the urgent care center down the block.

I try to stop an abused amphetamine and dextroamphetamine, and not only do the drugs show up in the urine toxicology test a month later (from the brother’s girlfriend’s sister) but the screening will be positive for cocaine (from the sister’s boyfriend’s brother) and probably alprazolam, too. 

People want what they want, and I believe what they want is the overwhelming need not to feel, and especially to not feel our natural and uncomfortable states of pain, sadness, anxiety, fatigue, and discomfort (sometimes all at once). They will use anything orally or intravenously or nasally to make those feelings go away.

I am an addiction specialist so I write this commentary out of care and concern and recognition of how much, pain both physical and psychic, people suffer.

Perhaps we as physicians are conditioned to believe that we must prescribe “something” to the patient who is uncomfortable and sitting in front of us. In general we are sympathetic to the needs of those who come to us in distress, and we try our best to help reduce their symptoms.

I know that we cannot simply “fire” people, because these patients are ours to take care of; they are our responsibility, though this is our overused response to “difficult” patients. 

And I know that we have insufficient replacements for these medications. We stopped prescribing oxycodone and now people are on gabapentin in the highest doses, diversion is up, and so is its abuse.

Many of us regularly teach about breathing and mindfulness. I discuss trauma and talk therapy. I order physical therapy and walking regimens and podcasts. But our relationship is transactional, and in prescribing a medication, I have shown them that I am hearing them. I hate this feeling of being trapped. 

I spend much of my day negotiating and drive home at night feeling like nothing more than a vending machine.

Dr. Hambright is with the department of addiction medicine at Samaritan Daytop Village, Ellenville, N.Y., and Samadhi Recovery Community Outreach Center, Kingston, N.Y. She disclosed no relevant conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The overprescribing of opioid pain medications has given way to an overprescribing of anxiolytics, sedatives, and stimulants. The results are unsafe and dangerous.

When we address this problem with patients, some become immediately defensive, making it difficult to modify treatment regimens. It’s almost as if people believe that they have a “right” to their medications and nobody should dare take them away. Even when I think the interaction goes relatively smoothly, the outcome usually shows otherwise.

I will decrease gabapentin from 3,200 mg per day and they will come back with cyclobenzaprine from the urgent care center down the block.

I try to stop an abused amphetamine and dextroamphetamine, and not only do the drugs show up in the urine toxicology test a month later (from the brother’s girlfriend’s sister) but the screening will be positive for cocaine (from the sister’s boyfriend’s brother) and probably alprazolam, too. 

People want what they want, and I believe what they want is the overwhelming need not to feel, and especially to not feel our natural and uncomfortable states of pain, sadness, anxiety, fatigue, and discomfort (sometimes all at once). They will use anything orally or intravenously or nasally to make those feelings go away.

I am an addiction specialist so I write this commentary out of care and concern and recognition of how much, pain both physical and psychic, people suffer.

Perhaps we as physicians are conditioned to believe that we must prescribe “something” to the patient who is uncomfortable and sitting in front of us. In general we are sympathetic to the needs of those who come to us in distress, and we try our best to help reduce their symptoms.

I know that we cannot simply “fire” people, because these patients are ours to take care of; they are our responsibility, though this is our overused response to “difficult” patients. 

And I know that we have insufficient replacements for these medications. We stopped prescribing oxycodone and now people are on gabapentin in the highest doses, diversion is up, and so is its abuse.

Many of us regularly teach about breathing and mindfulness. I discuss trauma and talk therapy. I order physical therapy and walking regimens and podcasts. But our relationship is transactional, and in prescribing a medication, I have shown them that I am hearing them. I hate this feeling of being trapped. 

I spend much of my day negotiating and drive home at night feeling like nothing more than a vending machine.

Dr. Hambright is with the department of addiction medicine at Samaritan Daytop Village, Ellenville, N.Y., and Samadhi Recovery Community Outreach Center, Kingston, N.Y. She disclosed no relevant conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The overprescribing of opioid pain medications has given way to an overprescribing of anxiolytics, sedatives, and stimulants. The results are unsafe and dangerous.

When we address this problem with patients, some become immediately defensive, making it difficult to modify treatment regimens. It’s almost as if people believe that they have a “right” to their medications and nobody should dare take them away. Even when I think the interaction goes relatively smoothly, the outcome usually shows otherwise.

I will decrease gabapentin from 3,200 mg per day and they will come back with cyclobenzaprine from the urgent care center down the block.

I try to stop an abused amphetamine and dextroamphetamine, and not only do the drugs show up in the urine toxicology test a month later (from the brother’s girlfriend’s sister) but the screening will be positive for cocaine (from the sister’s boyfriend’s brother) and probably alprazolam, too. 

People want what they want, and I believe what they want is the overwhelming need not to feel, and especially to not feel our natural and uncomfortable states of pain, sadness, anxiety, fatigue, and discomfort (sometimes all at once). They will use anything orally or intravenously or nasally to make those feelings go away.

I am an addiction specialist so I write this commentary out of care and concern and recognition of how much, pain both physical and psychic, people suffer.

Perhaps we as physicians are conditioned to believe that we must prescribe “something” to the patient who is uncomfortable and sitting in front of us. In general we are sympathetic to the needs of those who come to us in distress, and we try our best to help reduce their symptoms.

I know that we cannot simply “fire” people, because these patients are ours to take care of; they are our responsibility, though this is our overused response to “difficult” patients. 

And I know that we have insufficient replacements for these medications. We stopped prescribing oxycodone and now people are on gabapentin in the highest doses, diversion is up, and so is its abuse.

Many of us regularly teach about breathing and mindfulness. I discuss trauma and talk therapy. I order physical therapy and walking regimens and podcasts. But our relationship is transactional, and in prescribing a medication, I have shown them that I am hearing them. I hate this feeling of being trapped. 

I spend much of my day negotiating and drive home at night feeling like nothing more than a vending machine.

Dr. Hambright is with the department of addiction medicine at Samaritan Daytop Village, Ellenville, N.Y., and Samadhi Recovery Community Outreach Center, Kingston, N.Y. She disclosed no relevant conflicts of interest.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

CHICAGO – Twice as many U.S. adults have obesity based on assessment of their fat volume by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan compared with measurement of body mass index (BMI), a finding that highlights the shortcomings of BMI and adds to the growing case that BMI alone should not be the default gauge for obesity.

“BMI vastly underestimates true obesity,” Aayush Visaria, MD, said at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.

His findings highlight that “BMI should be supplemented with other measures of obesity” for the management of individual patients, with assessments that could include a bioelectrical impedance scale or waist circumference, said Dr. Visaria, a researcher at Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Brunswick, N.J.

Dr. Visaria cited a new policy issued by the American Medical Association a couple of days before his presentation, which advises that BMI “be used in conjunction with other valid measures of risk such as, but not limited to, measurements of visceral fat, body adiposity index, body composition, relative fat mass, waist circumference, and genetic/metabolic factors.”

“We’re at the start of the end of BMI,” Dr. Visaria declared during a press briefing at the meeting.

He said DEXA is not practical or cost-effective for obesity screening in routine practice. Therefore, he predicts that waist circumference, often expressed as waist-to-height ratio, will be measured more often, although he acknowledged that waist measurement can be difficult. However, better physician training on the measure should help it become the norm.

Another useful tool for obesity measurement he foresees quickly becoming widespread is bathroom scales that record both weight and body fat percentage using a small electric current to make a bioelectrical impedance measure of adiposity.

Bioimpedance scales will provide more standardized measurements than waist circumference and “revolutionize how we measure obesity,” Dr. Visaria predicted. They are “very accessible and cheap,” he noted, with many models sold for less than $100.
 

Obesity prevalence of 74%

The study by Dr. Visaria and colleagues used data from 9,784 U.S. adults aged 20-59 years (average age, 39 years) collected in several National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys during 2011-2018. All these participants underwent DEXA assessment of their total body fat as well as a BMI calculation.

Using standard obesity cutoffs for both BMI and total body fat, Dr. Visaria found that DEXA rated 74% of participants as having obesity based on body fat compared with 36% based on BMI.

Among the 64% of the study group who were not obese by BMI, DEXA scans showed 53% of this subgroup did have obesity based on body fat content. Among those with a normal BMI, 43% had obesity by DEXA result.

Further analysis showed that when Dr. Visaria added waist circumference to BMI to enlarge the diagnostic net for obesity it cut the percentage of adults missed as having obesity by BMI alone nearly in half.

Additional analyses showed that the rate of missed diagnoses of obesity by BMI was most common only among people of Hispanic or Asian ethnicity, with both groups showing a 49% rate of obesity by DEXA among those with normal-range BMIs.

The rate of missed obesity diagnoses was highest among all women, with a 59% prevalence of obesity by DEXA among women with a normal-range BMI.

The study received no commercial funding. Dr. Visaria has reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

CHICAGO – Twice as many U.S. adults have obesity based on assessment of their fat volume by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan compared with measurement of body mass index (BMI), a finding that highlights the shortcomings of BMI and adds to the growing case that BMI alone should not be the default gauge for obesity.

“BMI vastly underestimates true obesity,” Aayush Visaria, MD, said at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.

His findings highlight that “BMI should be supplemented with other measures of obesity” for the management of individual patients, with assessments that could include a bioelectrical impedance scale or waist circumference, said Dr. Visaria, a researcher at Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Brunswick, N.J.

Dr. Visaria cited a new policy issued by the American Medical Association a couple of days before his presentation, which advises that BMI “be used in conjunction with other valid measures of risk such as, but not limited to, measurements of visceral fat, body adiposity index, body composition, relative fat mass, waist circumference, and genetic/metabolic factors.”

“We’re at the start of the end of BMI,” Dr. Visaria declared during a press briefing at the meeting.

He said DEXA is not practical or cost-effective for obesity screening in routine practice. Therefore, he predicts that waist circumference, often expressed as waist-to-height ratio, will be measured more often, although he acknowledged that waist measurement can be difficult. However, better physician training on the measure should help it become the norm.

Another useful tool for obesity measurement he foresees quickly becoming widespread is bathroom scales that record both weight and body fat percentage using a small electric current to make a bioelectrical impedance measure of adiposity.

Bioimpedance scales will provide more standardized measurements than waist circumference and “revolutionize how we measure obesity,” Dr. Visaria predicted. They are “very accessible and cheap,” he noted, with many models sold for less than $100.
 

Obesity prevalence of 74%

The study by Dr. Visaria and colleagues used data from 9,784 U.S. adults aged 20-59 years (average age, 39 years) collected in several National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys during 2011-2018. All these participants underwent DEXA assessment of their total body fat as well as a BMI calculation.

Using standard obesity cutoffs for both BMI and total body fat, Dr. Visaria found that DEXA rated 74% of participants as having obesity based on body fat compared with 36% based on BMI.

Among the 64% of the study group who were not obese by BMI, DEXA scans showed 53% of this subgroup did have obesity based on body fat content. Among those with a normal BMI, 43% had obesity by DEXA result.

Further analysis showed that when Dr. Visaria added waist circumference to BMI to enlarge the diagnostic net for obesity it cut the percentage of adults missed as having obesity by BMI alone nearly in half.

Additional analyses showed that the rate of missed diagnoses of obesity by BMI was most common only among people of Hispanic or Asian ethnicity, with both groups showing a 49% rate of obesity by DEXA among those with normal-range BMIs.

The rate of missed obesity diagnoses was highest among all women, with a 59% prevalence of obesity by DEXA among women with a normal-range BMI.

The study received no commercial funding. Dr. Visaria has reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

CHICAGO – Twice as many U.S. adults have obesity based on assessment of their fat volume by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan compared with measurement of body mass index (BMI), a finding that highlights the shortcomings of BMI and adds to the growing case that BMI alone should not be the default gauge for obesity.

“BMI vastly underestimates true obesity,” Aayush Visaria, MD, said at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.

His findings highlight that “BMI should be supplemented with other measures of obesity” for the management of individual patients, with assessments that could include a bioelectrical impedance scale or waist circumference, said Dr. Visaria, a researcher at Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Brunswick, N.J.

Dr. Visaria cited a new policy issued by the American Medical Association a couple of days before his presentation, which advises that BMI “be used in conjunction with other valid measures of risk such as, but not limited to, measurements of visceral fat, body adiposity index, body composition, relative fat mass, waist circumference, and genetic/metabolic factors.”

“We’re at the start of the end of BMI,” Dr. Visaria declared during a press briefing at the meeting.

He said DEXA is not practical or cost-effective for obesity screening in routine practice. Therefore, he predicts that waist circumference, often expressed as waist-to-height ratio, will be measured more often, although he acknowledged that waist measurement can be difficult. However, better physician training on the measure should help it become the norm.

Another useful tool for obesity measurement he foresees quickly becoming widespread is bathroom scales that record both weight and body fat percentage using a small electric current to make a bioelectrical impedance measure of adiposity.

Bioimpedance scales will provide more standardized measurements than waist circumference and “revolutionize how we measure obesity,” Dr. Visaria predicted. They are “very accessible and cheap,” he noted, with many models sold for less than $100.
 

Obesity prevalence of 74%

The study by Dr. Visaria and colleagues used data from 9,784 U.S. adults aged 20-59 years (average age, 39 years) collected in several National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys during 2011-2018. All these participants underwent DEXA assessment of their total body fat as well as a BMI calculation.

Using standard obesity cutoffs for both BMI and total body fat, Dr. Visaria found that DEXA rated 74% of participants as having obesity based on body fat compared with 36% based on BMI.

Among the 64% of the study group who were not obese by BMI, DEXA scans showed 53% of this subgroup did have obesity based on body fat content. Among those with a normal BMI, 43% had obesity by DEXA result.

Further analysis showed that when Dr. Visaria added waist circumference to BMI to enlarge the diagnostic net for obesity it cut the percentage of adults missed as having obesity by BMI alone nearly in half.

Additional analyses showed that the rate of missed diagnoses of obesity by BMI was most common only among people of Hispanic or Asian ethnicity, with both groups showing a 49% rate of obesity by DEXA among those with normal-range BMIs.

The rate of missed obesity diagnoses was highest among all women, with a 59% prevalence of obesity by DEXA among women with a normal-range BMI.

The study received no commercial funding. Dr. Visaria has reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Key clinical point: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who were ≥65 years old had a significantly increased risk of developing sarcopenia, particularly if they were men with poor nutritional status and long-standing disease.

Major finding: Sarcopenia was diagnosed in a higher proportion of patients with RA vs control individuals without RA (15.8% vs 3.9%; P = .014). Male sex (P = .042), longer disease duration (P = .012), and poorer nutritional status (P = .042) were significant risk factors for the development of sarcopenia in older patients with RA.

Study details: Findings are from a cross-sectional study including 76 patients age ≥ 65 years with RA and 76 age- and sex-matched control individuals without RA.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Redes de Investigación Cooperativa Orientadas a Resultados en Salud, Spain, and other sources. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Cano-García L et al. Sarcopenia and nutrition in elderly rheumatoid arthritis patients: A cross-sectional study to determine prevalence and risk factors. Nutrients. 2023;15:2440 (May 24). doi: 10.3390/nu15112440

Key clinical point: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who were ≥65 years old had a significantly increased risk of developing sarcopenia, particularly if they were men with poor nutritional status and long-standing disease.

Major finding: Sarcopenia was diagnosed in a higher proportion of patients with RA vs control individuals without RA (15.8% vs 3.9%; P = .014). Male sex (P = .042), longer disease duration (P = .012), and poorer nutritional status (P = .042) were significant risk factors for the development of sarcopenia in older patients with RA.

Study details: Findings are from a cross-sectional study including 76 patients age ≥ 65 years with RA and 76 age- and sex-matched control individuals without RA.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Redes de Investigación Cooperativa Orientadas a Resultados en Salud, Spain, and other sources. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Cano-García L et al. Sarcopenia and nutrition in elderly rheumatoid arthritis patients: A cross-sectional study to determine prevalence and risk factors. Nutrients. 2023;15:2440 (May 24). doi: 10.3390/nu15112440

Key clinical point: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who were ≥65 years old had a significantly increased risk of developing sarcopenia, particularly if they were men with poor nutritional status and long-standing disease.

Major finding: Sarcopenia was diagnosed in a higher proportion of patients with RA vs control individuals without RA (15.8% vs 3.9%; P = .014). Male sex (P = .042), longer disease duration (P = .012), and poorer nutritional status (P = .042) were significant risk factors for the development of sarcopenia in older patients with RA.

Study details: Findings are from a cross-sectional study including 76 patients age ≥ 65 years with RA and 76 age- and sex-matched control individuals without RA.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Redes de Investigación Cooperativa Orientadas a Resultados en Salud, Spain, and other sources. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Cano-García L et al. Sarcopenia and nutrition in elderly rheumatoid arthritis patients: A cross-sectional study to determine prevalence and risk factors. Nutrients. 2023;15:2440 (May 24). doi: 10.3390/nu15112440

Key clinical point: Intensive treatment more effectively suppressed joint damage progression than the current treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who showed joint damage progression and had low disease activity (LDA) or were in remission.

Major finding: At 1 year of treatment, intensive vs current treatment was associated with a smaller change in the van der Heijde modified total Sharp score (ΔTSS; 0.67 vs 1.79; P < .001) and joint space narrowing scores (0.57 vs 1.41; P < .001) and a larger proportion of patients achieved a ΔTSS of ≤0.5 (66.7% vs 32.4%; P = .010).

Study details: This retrospective study included 89 patients with RA in remission or with LDA who showed joint damage progression and were assigned to either receive intensive treatment or continue the current treatment.

Disclosures: This study did not declare the funding source. T Mochizuki, K Yano, and K Ikari declared receiving lecture honoraria from various sources. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Mochizuki T et al. Intensive treatment for the progression of joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis patients with low disease activity or remission. Mod Rheumatol. 2023 (Jun 2). doi: 10.1093/mr/road041

Key clinical point: Intensive treatment more effectively suppressed joint damage progression than the current treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who showed joint damage progression and had low disease activity (LDA) or were in remission.

Major finding: At 1 year of treatment, intensive vs current treatment was associated with a smaller change in the van der Heijde modified total Sharp score (ΔTSS; 0.67 vs 1.79; P < .001) and joint space narrowing scores (0.57 vs 1.41; P < .001) and a larger proportion of patients achieved a ΔTSS of ≤0.5 (66.7% vs 32.4%; P = .010).

Study details: This retrospective study included 89 patients with RA in remission or with LDA who showed joint damage progression and were assigned to either receive intensive treatment or continue the current treatment.

Disclosures: This study did not declare the funding source. T Mochizuki, K Yano, and K Ikari declared receiving lecture honoraria from various sources. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Mochizuki T et al. Intensive treatment for the progression of joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis patients with low disease activity or remission. Mod Rheumatol. 2023 (Jun 2). doi: 10.1093/mr/road041

Key clinical point: Intensive treatment more effectively suppressed joint damage progression than the current treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who showed joint damage progression and had low disease activity (LDA) or were in remission.

Major finding: At 1 year of treatment, intensive vs current treatment was associated with a smaller change in the van der Heijde modified total Sharp score (ΔTSS; 0.67 vs 1.79; P < .001) and joint space narrowing scores (0.57 vs 1.41; P < .001) and a larger proportion of patients achieved a ΔTSS of ≤0.5 (66.7% vs 32.4%; P = .010).

Study details: This retrospective study included 89 patients with RA in remission or with LDA who showed joint damage progression and were assigned to either receive intensive treatment or continue the current treatment.

Disclosures: This study did not declare the funding source. T Mochizuki, K Yano, and K Ikari declared receiving lecture honoraria from various sources. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Mochizuki T et al. Intensive treatment for the progression of joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis patients with low disease activity or remission. Mod Rheumatol. 2023 (Jun 2). doi: 10.1093/mr/road041

Key clinical point: Ultrasound detected subclinical inflammation in the wrist joints of most patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical remission or with lower disease activity, with the risk for subclinical inflammation being lower among those using biologic therapy.

Major finding: Overall, subclinical inflammation was detected in 57.4% of the patients in complete remission or with lower disease activity. Factors negatively associated with subclinical inflammation included the use of biologic therapy (odds ratio [OR] 0.59; P = .001), methotrexate (OR 0.83; P = .020), and glucocorticoids (OR 0.60; P = .001) and alcohol consumption (OR 0.55; P = .006).

Study details: This cross-sectional study included 1248 patients with RA who underwent gray scale and power Doppler ultrasound assessments of the dorsal radiolunate joints of both wrists.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, and other sources. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Wang YW et al. Factors associated with subclinical inflammation of wrist joints in rheumatoid arthritis patients with low or no disease activity—A RA ultrasound registry study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023;24:438 (May 30). doi: 10.1186/s12891-023-06521-8

Key clinical point: Ultrasound detected subclinical inflammation in the wrist joints of most patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical remission or with lower disease activity, with the risk for subclinical inflammation being lower among those using biologic therapy.

Major finding: Overall, subclinical inflammation was detected in 57.4% of the patients in complete remission or with lower disease activity. Factors negatively associated with subclinical inflammation included the use of biologic therapy (odds ratio [OR] 0.59; P = .001), methotrexate (OR 0.83; P = .020), and glucocorticoids (OR 0.60; P = .001) and alcohol consumption (OR 0.55; P = .006).

Study details: This cross-sectional study included 1248 patients with RA who underwent gray scale and power Doppler ultrasound assessments of the dorsal radiolunate joints of both wrists.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, and other sources. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Wang YW et al. Factors associated with subclinical inflammation of wrist joints in rheumatoid arthritis patients with low or no disease activity—A RA ultrasound registry study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023;24:438 (May 30). doi: 10.1186/s12891-023-06521-8

Key clinical point: Ultrasound detected subclinical inflammation in the wrist joints of most patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical remission or with lower disease activity, with the risk for subclinical inflammation being lower among those using biologic therapy.

Major finding: Overall, subclinical inflammation was detected in 57.4% of the patients in complete remission or with lower disease activity. Factors negatively associated with subclinical inflammation included the use of biologic therapy (odds ratio [OR] 0.59; P = .001), methotrexate (OR 0.83; P = .020), and glucocorticoids (OR 0.60; P = .001) and alcohol consumption (OR 0.55; P = .006).

Study details: This cross-sectional study included 1248 patients with RA who underwent gray scale and power Doppler ultrasound assessments of the dorsal radiolunate joints of both wrists.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, and other sources. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Wang YW et al. Factors associated with subclinical inflammation of wrist joints in rheumatoid arthritis patients with low or no disease activity—A RA ultrasound registry study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023;24:438 (May 30). doi: 10.1186/s12891-023-06521-8

Key clinical point: Depression significantly predicted death in patients with incident rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but with a strength similar to that in matched comparator individuals without RA.

Major finding: The risk for all-cause mortality was >3-fold higher (adjusted hazard rate ratio [aHRR] 3.15; 95% CI 2.62-3.79) in patients with RA with vs without depression, with the risk being higher among patients age < 55 years compared with other age groups (aHRR 8.13; 95% CI 3.89-17.02). In addition, depression predicted all-cause mortality with similar strength in comparator individuals without RA (aHRR 3.77; 95% CI 3.48-4.08).

Study details: This study included 11,071 patients with incident RA and 55,355 matched comparator individuals without RA from the general population.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Danish Rheumatism Association. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Pedersen JK et al. Mortality in patients with incident rheumatoid arthritis and depression: A Danish cohort study of 11,071 patients and 55,355 comparators. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2023 (May 30). doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kead259

Key clinical point: Depression significantly predicted death in patients with incident rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but with a strength similar to that in matched comparator individuals without RA.

Major finding: The risk for all-cause mortality was >3-fold higher (adjusted hazard rate ratio [aHRR] 3.15; 95% CI 2.62-3.79) in patients with RA with vs without depression, with the risk being higher among patients age < 55 years compared with other age groups (aHRR 8.13; 95% CI 3.89-17.02). In addition, depression predicted all-cause mortality with similar strength in comparator individuals without RA (aHRR 3.77; 95% CI 3.48-4.08).

Study details: This study included 11,071 patients with incident RA and 55,355 matched comparator individuals without RA from the general population.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Danish Rheumatism Association. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Pedersen JK et al. Mortality in patients with incident rheumatoid arthritis and depression: A Danish cohort study of 11,071 patients and 55,355 comparators. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2023 (May 30). doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kead259

Key clinical point: Depression significantly predicted death in patients with incident rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but with a strength similar to that in matched comparator individuals without RA.

Major finding: The risk for all-cause mortality was >3-fold higher (adjusted hazard rate ratio [aHRR] 3.15; 95% CI 2.62-3.79) in patients with RA with vs without depression, with the risk being higher among patients age < 55 years compared with other age groups (aHRR 8.13; 95% CI 3.89-17.02). In addition, depression predicted all-cause mortality with similar strength in comparator individuals without RA (aHRR 3.77; 95% CI 3.48-4.08).

Study details: This study included 11,071 patients with incident RA and 55,355 matched comparator individuals without RA from the general population.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Danish Rheumatism Association. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Pedersen JK et al. Mortality in patients with incident rheumatoid arthritis and depression: A Danish cohort study of 11,071 patients and 55,355 comparators. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2023 (May 30). doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kead259

Key clinical point: Perioperative use of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) seemed safe in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) undergoing orthopedic procedures; however, the benefits of withholding JAKi to prevent postoperative complications should be balanced against the risk for a flare-up in disease activity.

Major finding: Overall, 20 patients undergoing 31 orthopedic procedures continued JAKi perioperatively, whereas 16 patients undergoing 18 procedures discontinued JAKi perioperatively by ≥1 dose for various reasons. No surgical site infections were reported during ≥90 days of follow-up. Disease flare-up was observed in 2 patients who discontinued JAKi for 3 and 14 days, respectively; however, those who discontinued JAKi for ≤1 day showed no flare-up.

Study details: This retrospective study included 32 patients with RA who had disease under control with JAKi and underwent a total of 49 orthopedic procedures.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding, grants, or other support. K Nishida declared receiving research grants or speaker fees from various sources.

Source: Nishida K et al. Influence of Janus kinase inhibitors on early postoperative complications in patients with rheumatoid arthritis undergoing orthopaedic surgeries. Mod Rheumatol. 2023 (Jun 3). doi: 10.1093/mr/road047

Key clinical point: Perioperative use of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) seemed safe in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) undergoing orthopedic procedures; however, the benefits of withholding JAKi to prevent postoperative complications should be balanced against the risk for a flare-up in disease activity.

Major finding: Overall, 20 patients undergoing 31 orthopedic procedures continued JAKi perioperatively, whereas 16 patients undergoing 18 procedures discontinued JAKi perioperatively by ≥1 dose for various reasons. No surgical site infections were reported during ≥90 days of follow-up. Disease flare-up was observed in 2 patients who discontinued JAKi for 3 and 14 days, respectively; however, those who discontinued JAKi for ≤1 day showed no flare-up.

Study details: This retrospective study included 32 patients with RA who had disease under control with JAKi and underwent a total of 49 orthopedic procedures.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding, grants, or other support. K Nishida declared receiving research grants or speaker fees from various sources.

Source: Nishida K et al. Influence of Janus kinase inhibitors on early postoperative complications in patients with rheumatoid arthritis undergoing orthopaedic surgeries. Mod Rheumatol. 2023 (Jun 3). doi: 10.1093/mr/road047

Key clinical point: Perioperative use of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) seemed safe in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) undergoing orthopedic procedures; however, the benefits of withholding JAKi to prevent postoperative complications should be balanced against the risk for a flare-up in disease activity.

Major finding: Overall, 20 patients undergoing 31 orthopedic procedures continued JAKi perioperatively, whereas 16 patients undergoing 18 procedures discontinued JAKi perioperatively by ≥1 dose for various reasons. No surgical site infections were reported during ≥90 days of follow-up. Disease flare-up was observed in 2 patients who discontinued JAKi for 3 and 14 days, respectively; however, those who discontinued JAKi for ≤1 day showed no flare-up.

Study details: This retrospective study included 32 patients with RA who had disease under control with JAKi and underwent a total of 49 orthopedic procedures.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding, grants, or other support. K Nishida declared receiving research grants or speaker fees from various sources.

Source: Nishida K et al. Influence of Janus kinase inhibitors on early postoperative complications in patients with rheumatoid arthritis undergoing orthopaedic surgeries. Mod Rheumatol. 2023 (Jun 3). doi: 10.1093/mr/road047

Key clinical point: Hydroxychloroquine treatment conferred survival benefits in a dose-dependent manner in patients with elderly-onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with patients receiving a monthly cumulative dose of 1374.5-5778.5 mg or more showing better survival than those receiving <1374.5 mg.

Major finding: Hydroxychloroquine treatment was a protective factor against mortality in patients with elderly-onset RA (hazard ratio 0.30; P = .002), with a cumulative dose of <1374.5 mg vs 1374.5-5,778.5 mg or more leading to the lowest survival rate (P < .001).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective observational study including 980 patients with elderly-onset RA (disease onset after 60 years of age) who had received conventional synthetic, biologic, or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the National Science and Technology Council, Taiwan, and other sources. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Lin CT et al. Association of hydroxychloroquine use with a dose-dependent decrease in mortality risk in patients with elderly-onset rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatol Ther. 2023 (May 12). Doi: 10.1007/s40744-023-00561-1

Key clinical point: Hydroxychloroquine treatment conferred survival benefits in a dose-dependent manner in patients with elderly-onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with patients receiving a monthly cumulative dose of 1374.5-5778.5 mg or more showing better survival than those receiving <1374.5 mg.

Major finding: Hydroxychloroquine treatment was a protective factor against mortality in patients with elderly-onset RA (hazard ratio 0.30; P = .002), with a cumulative dose of <1374.5 mg vs 1374.5-5,778.5 mg or more leading to the lowest survival rate (P < .001).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective observational study including 980 patients with elderly-onset RA (disease onset after 60 years of age) who had received conventional synthetic, biologic, or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the National Science and Technology Council, Taiwan, and other sources. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Lin CT et al. Association of hydroxychloroquine use with a dose-dependent decrease in mortality risk in patients with elderly-onset rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatol Ther. 2023 (May 12). Doi: 10.1007/s40744-023-00561-1

Key clinical point: Hydroxychloroquine treatment conferred survival benefits in a dose-dependent manner in patients with elderly-onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA), with patients receiving a monthly cumulative dose of 1374.5-5778.5 mg or more showing better survival than those receiving <1374.5 mg.

Major finding: Hydroxychloroquine treatment was a protective factor against mortality in patients with elderly-onset RA (hazard ratio 0.30; P = .002), with a cumulative dose of <1374.5 mg vs 1374.5-5,778.5 mg or more leading to the lowest survival rate (P < .001).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective observational study including 980 patients with elderly-onset RA (disease onset after 60 years of age) who had received conventional synthetic, biologic, or targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the National Science and Technology Council, Taiwan, and other sources. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Lin CT et al. Association of hydroxychloroquine use with a dose-dependent decrease in mortality risk in patients with elderly-onset rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatol Ther. 2023 (May 12). Doi: 10.1007/s40744-023-00561-1

Key clinical point: Tofacitinib use increased the risk for herpes zoster (HZ) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) compared with tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi); however, the rate of serious HZ or tofacitinib discontinuation due to HZ was low.

Major finding: The incidence of HZ was significantly higher among patients receiving tofacitinib vs TNFi (incidence rate ratio 8.33; P < .001). However, the incidence of serious HZ was not significantly different between the groups (P = .452), with HZ leading to only one case of permanent tofacitinib discontinuation.

Study details: This study included 912 patients with RA from two single-center prospective cohorts (tofacitinib cohort n = 200 and TNFi cohort n = 712).

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea, and Pfizer. Two authors declared being employees and shareholders of Pfizer Inc. YK Sung declared receiving research grants from Pfizer and other sources. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Song YJ et al. Increased risk of herpes zoster with tofacitinib treatment in Korean patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A single‑center prospective study. Sci Rep. 2023;13:7877 (May 15). doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-33718-7

Key clinical point: Tofacitinib use increased the risk for herpes zoster (HZ) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) compared with tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi); however, the rate of serious HZ or tofacitinib discontinuation due to HZ was low.

Major finding: The incidence of HZ was significantly higher among patients receiving tofacitinib vs TNFi (incidence rate ratio 8.33; P < .001). However, the incidence of serious HZ was not significantly different between the groups (P = .452), with HZ leading to only one case of permanent tofacitinib discontinuation.

Study details: This study included 912 patients with RA from two single-center prospective cohorts (tofacitinib cohort n = 200 and TNFi cohort n = 712).

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea, and Pfizer. Two authors declared being employees and shareholders of Pfizer Inc. YK Sung declared receiving research grants from Pfizer and other sources. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Song YJ et al. Increased risk of herpes zoster with tofacitinib treatment in Korean patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A single‑center prospective study. Sci Rep. 2023;13:7877 (May 15). doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-33718-7

Key clinical point: Tofacitinib use increased the risk for herpes zoster (HZ) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) compared with tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi); however, the rate of serious HZ or tofacitinib discontinuation due to HZ was low.

Major finding: The incidence of HZ was significantly higher among patients receiving tofacitinib vs TNFi (incidence rate ratio 8.33; P < .001). However, the incidence of serious HZ was not significantly different between the groups (P = .452), with HZ leading to only one case of permanent tofacitinib discontinuation.

Study details: This study included 912 patients with RA from two single-center prospective cohorts (tofacitinib cohort n = 200 and TNFi cohort n = 712).

Disclosures: This study was supported by the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea, and Pfizer. Two authors declared being employees and shareholders of Pfizer Inc. YK Sung declared receiving research grants from Pfizer and other sources. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Song YJ et al. Increased risk of herpes zoster with tofacitinib treatment in Korean patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A single‑center prospective study. Sci Rep. 2023;13:7877 (May 15). doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-33718-7

Key clinical point: Frailty is a significant contributing factor leading to methotrexate discontinuation due to adverse events in long-term pretreated patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Major finding: Overall, 7.4% of the patients discontinued methotrexate due to adverse events during 2 years of follow-up, with methotrexate retention being significantly lower among patients with vs without frailty (P < .05) and frailty being a significant factor contributing to methotrexate discontinuation (adjusted hazard ratio 2.34; 95% CI 1.02-5.37).

Study details: This retrospective longitudinal study included 323 patients with RA who used methotrexate at baseline.

Disclosures: This study did not declare the funding source. The authors did not report conflicts of interest.

Source: Sobue Y et al. Relationship between frailty and methotrexate discontinuation due to adverse events in rheumatoid arthritis patients. Clin Rheumatol. 2023 (May 22). doi: 10.1007/s10067-023-06639-z

Key clinical point: Frailty is a significant contributing factor leading to methotrexate discontinuation due to adverse events in long-term pretreated patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Major finding: Overall, 7.4% of the patients discontinued methotrexate due to adverse events during 2 years of follow-up, with methotrexate retention being significantly lower among patients with vs without frailty (P < .05) and frailty being a significant factor contributing to methotrexate discontinuation (adjusted hazard ratio 2.34; 95% CI 1.02-5.37).

Study details: This retrospective longitudinal study included 323 patients with RA who used methotrexate at baseline.

Disclosures: This study did not declare the funding source. The authors did not report conflicts of interest.

Source: Sobue Y et al. Relationship between frailty and methotrexate discontinuation due to adverse events in rheumatoid arthritis patients. Clin Rheumatol. 2023 (May 22). doi: 10.1007/s10067-023-06639-z

Key clinical point: Frailty is a significant contributing factor leading to methotrexate discontinuation due to adverse events in long-term pretreated patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Major finding: Overall, 7.4% of the patients discontinued methotrexate due to adverse events during 2 years of follow-up, with methotrexate retention being significantly lower among patients with vs without frailty (P < .05) and frailty being a significant factor contributing to methotrexate discontinuation (adjusted hazard ratio 2.34; 95% CI 1.02-5.37).

Study details: This retrospective longitudinal study included 323 patients with RA who used methotrexate at baseline.

Disclosures: This study did not declare the funding source. The authors did not report conflicts of interest.

Source: Sobue Y et al. Relationship between frailty and methotrexate discontinuation due to adverse events in rheumatoid arthritis patients. Clin Rheumatol. 2023 (May 22). doi: 10.1007/s10067-023-06639-z