User login
Dietary nutrient patterns may influence the intensity and duration of migraine headaches
Key clinical point: Clinical management of pain intensity and disability in patients with migraine would benefit from closely monitoring their dietary nutrient patterns.
Main finding: After adjusting for all confounders, higher consumption of vitamins B1 (thiamine), B3 (niacin), and B9 (folic acid). and carbohydrate, protein, and total fiber was positively associated with pain intensity as assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (regression coefficient [β] 0.37; P < .001), whereas that of vitamins A, K, C, B6, B2 (riboflavin), and calcium and magnesium was negatively associated with migraine-related disability measured by Migraine Disability Assessment (β −3.14; P = .01).
Study details: Findings are from a cross-sectional study involving 266 adult women with migraine and no chronic disease.
Disclosures: The study was sponsored by the Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Iran. The authors reported having no conflicts of interest.
Source: Bahrampour N et al. Br J Nutr. 2022 (Jan 17). Doi: 10.1017/S0007114522000046
Key clinical point: Clinical management of pain intensity and disability in patients with migraine would benefit from closely monitoring their dietary nutrient patterns.
Main finding: After adjusting for all confounders, higher consumption of vitamins B1 (thiamine), B3 (niacin), and B9 (folic acid). and carbohydrate, protein, and total fiber was positively associated with pain intensity as assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (regression coefficient [β] 0.37; P < .001), whereas that of vitamins A, K, C, B6, B2 (riboflavin), and calcium and magnesium was negatively associated with migraine-related disability measured by Migraine Disability Assessment (β −3.14; P = .01).
Study details: Findings are from a cross-sectional study involving 266 adult women with migraine and no chronic disease.
Disclosures: The study was sponsored by the Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Iran. The authors reported having no conflicts of interest.
Source: Bahrampour N et al. Br J Nutr. 2022 (Jan 17). Doi: 10.1017/S0007114522000046
Key clinical point: Clinical management of pain intensity and disability in patients with migraine would benefit from closely monitoring their dietary nutrient patterns.
Main finding: After adjusting for all confounders, higher consumption of vitamins B1 (thiamine), B3 (niacin), and B9 (folic acid). and carbohydrate, protein, and total fiber was positively associated with pain intensity as assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (regression coefficient [β] 0.37; P < .001), whereas that of vitamins A, K, C, B6, B2 (riboflavin), and calcium and magnesium was negatively associated with migraine-related disability measured by Migraine Disability Assessment (β −3.14; P = .01).
Study details: Findings are from a cross-sectional study involving 266 adult women with migraine and no chronic disease.
Disclosures: The study was sponsored by the Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Iran. The authors reported having no conflicts of interest.
Source: Bahrampour N et al. Br J Nutr. 2022 (Jan 17). Doi: 10.1017/S0007114522000046
Migraine negatively correlates with large artery atherosclerosis in ischemic stroke
Key clinical point: Migraine, migraine with aura (MWA), and migraine without aura (MWoA) are negatively associated with large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) in young patients with ischemic stroke, irrespective of traditional vascular risk factors.
Major finding: LAA of any grade was significantly less frequent in patients with migraine (P < .001), MWA (P < .001), and MWoA (P = .005) vs. those without migraine. Migraine (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.44; P = .005), MWoA (aOR 0.42; P = .020), and MWA (aOR 0.47; P = .037) vs. no migraine showed a negative association with LAA of any grade.
Study details: Findings are from a cross-sectional study including 415 patients aged 18-54 years with first-ever acute ischemic stroke, of which 144 had migraine (MWA, n = 76; MWoA, n = 68).
Disclosures: No funding was received for this study. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Gollion C et al. Headache. 2022;62(2):191-7 (Feb 5). Doi: 10.1111/head.14265
Key clinical point: Migraine, migraine with aura (MWA), and migraine without aura (MWoA) are negatively associated with large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) in young patients with ischemic stroke, irrespective of traditional vascular risk factors.
Major finding: LAA of any grade was significantly less frequent in patients with migraine (P < .001), MWA (P < .001), and MWoA (P = .005) vs. those without migraine. Migraine (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.44; P = .005), MWoA (aOR 0.42; P = .020), and MWA (aOR 0.47; P = .037) vs. no migraine showed a negative association with LAA of any grade.
Study details: Findings are from a cross-sectional study including 415 patients aged 18-54 years with first-ever acute ischemic stroke, of which 144 had migraine (MWA, n = 76; MWoA, n = 68).
Disclosures: No funding was received for this study. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Gollion C et al. Headache. 2022;62(2):191-7 (Feb 5). Doi: 10.1111/head.14265
Key clinical point: Migraine, migraine with aura (MWA), and migraine without aura (MWoA) are negatively associated with large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) in young patients with ischemic stroke, irrespective of traditional vascular risk factors.
Major finding: LAA of any grade was significantly less frequent in patients with migraine (P < .001), MWA (P < .001), and MWoA (P = .005) vs. those without migraine. Migraine (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.44; P = .005), MWoA (aOR 0.42; P = .020), and MWA (aOR 0.47; P = .037) vs. no migraine showed a negative association with LAA of any grade.
Study details: Findings are from a cross-sectional study including 415 patients aged 18-54 years with first-ever acute ischemic stroke, of which 144 had migraine (MWA, n = 76; MWoA, n = 68).
Disclosures: No funding was received for this study. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Gollion C et al. Headache. 2022;62(2):191-7 (Feb 5). Doi: 10.1111/head.14265
Caffeine cessation beneficial in episodic migraine
Key clinical point: Chronic caffeine use is associated with a reduced cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) in the posterior circulation of patients with episodic migraine, whereas caffeine cessation is associated with a significantly improved CVR.
Major finding: The breath-holding index (BHI) of the posterior cerebral arteries (PCA) was lower in caffeine users vs. nonusers (median 1.1 vs. 1.3; P = .03), with caffeine cessation being associated with a significant improvement in PCA-BHI (median 1.1 at baseline vs. 1.3 at 3 months of follow-up; P = .03) and independently associated with changes in PCA-BHI (adjusted unstandardized β 0.27; P = .04).
Study details: Findings are from a prospective, longitudinal, observational study of 84 adult patients with episodic migraine and no vascular risk factors, of whom 56 were caffeine users and were instructed to discontinue caffeine use.
Disclosures: The study was supported by the Dong-A ST and National Research Foundation of Korea grant funded by the Korean government. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Gil Y-E et al. Headache. 2022;62(2):169-75 (Feb 3). Doi: 10.1111/head.14263
Key clinical point: Chronic caffeine use is associated with a reduced cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) in the posterior circulation of patients with episodic migraine, whereas caffeine cessation is associated with a significantly improved CVR.
Major finding: The breath-holding index (BHI) of the posterior cerebral arteries (PCA) was lower in caffeine users vs. nonusers (median 1.1 vs. 1.3; P = .03), with caffeine cessation being associated with a significant improvement in PCA-BHI (median 1.1 at baseline vs. 1.3 at 3 months of follow-up; P = .03) and independently associated with changes in PCA-BHI (adjusted unstandardized β 0.27; P = .04).
Study details: Findings are from a prospective, longitudinal, observational study of 84 adult patients with episodic migraine and no vascular risk factors, of whom 56 were caffeine users and were instructed to discontinue caffeine use.
Disclosures: The study was supported by the Dong-A ST and National Research Foundation of Korea grant funded by the Korean government. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Gil Y-E et al. Headache. 2022;62(2):169-75 (Feb 3). Doi: 10.1111/head.14263
Key clinical point: Chronic caffeine use is associated with a reduced cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) in the posterior circulation of patients with episodic migraine, whereas caffeine cessation is associated with a significantly improved CVR.
Major finding: The breath-holding index (BHI) of the posterior cerebral arteries (PCA) was lower in caffeine users vs. nonusers (median 1.1 vs. 1.3; P = .03), with caffeine cessation being associated with a significant improvement in PCA-BHI (median 1.1 at baseline vs. 1.3 at 3 months of follow-up; P = .03) and independently associated with changes in PCA-BHI (adjusted unstandardized β 0.27; P = .04).
Study details: Findings are from a prospective, longitudinal, observational study of 84 adult patients with episodic migraine and no vascular risk factors, of whom 56 were caffeine users and were instructed to discontinue caffeine use.
Disclosures: The study was supported by the Dong-A ST and National Research Foundation of Korea grant funded by the Korean government. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Gil Y-E et al. Headache. 2022;62(2):169-75 (Feb 3). Doi: 10.1111/head.14263
Atorvastatin plus nortriptyline: A promising combination for migraine therapy
Key clinical point: Compared with nortriptyline alone, its combination with atorvastatin significantly reduces the frequency of headache and improves the quality of life (QOL) in patients with migraine; however, the effect on migraine intensity is nonsignificant.
Major finding: Atorvastatin plus nortriptyline vs. nortriptyline alone led to a significantly lower headache frequency (P = .004) at week 24 in addition to a significant improvement in the QOL at weeks 14 and 24 (both P = .001); however, no significant difference was observed in the headache intensity over 24 weeks.
Study details: This prospective, triple-blind, randomized controlled trial included 68 adult patients with migraine who were randomly assigned to receive atorvastatin plus nortriptyline (n = 34) or placebo plus nortriptyline (n = 34) for 24 weeks.
Disclosures: The study was supported by a grant from the Research and Technology Department of Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran. The authors reported having no conflicts of interest.
Source: Sherafat M et al. Neurol Res. 2022 (Jan 17). Doi: 10.1080/01616412.2021
Key clinical point: Compared with nortriptyline alone, its combination with atorvastatin significantly reduces the frequency of headache and improves the quality of life (QOL) in patients with migraine; however, the effect on migraine intensity is nonsignificant.
Major finding: Atorvastatin plus nortriptyline vs. nortriptyline alone led to a significantly lower headache frequency (P = .004) at week 24 in addition to a significant improvement in the QOL at weeks 14 and 24 (both P = .001); however, no significant difference was observed in the headache intensity over 24 weeks.
Study details: This prospective, triple-blind, randomized controlled trial included 68 adult patients with migraine who were randomly assigned to receive atorvastatin plus nortriptyline (n = 34) or placebo plus nortriptyline (n = 34) for 24 weeks.
Disclosures: The study was supported by a grant from the Research and Technology Department of Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran. The authors reported having no conflicts of interest.
Source: Sherafat M et al. Neurol Res. 2022 (Jan 17). Doi: 10.1080/01616412.2021
Key clinical point: Compared with nortriptyline alone, its combination with atorvastatin significantly reduces the frequency of headache and improves the quality of life (QOL) in patients with migraine; however, the effect on migraine intensity is nonsignificant.
Major finding: Atorvastatin plus nortriptyline vs. nortriptyline alone led to a significantly lower headache frequency (P = .004) at week 24 in addition to a significant improvement in the QOL at weeks 14 and 24 (both P = .001); however, no significant difference was observed in the headache intensity over 24 weeks.
Study details: This prospective, triple-blind, randomized controlled trial included 68 adult patients with migraine who were randomly assigned to receive atorvastatin plus nortriptyline (n = 34) or placebo plus nortriptyline (n = 34) for 24 weeks.
Disclosures: The study was supported by a grant from the Research and Technology Department of Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran. The authors reported having no conflicts of interest.
Source: Sherafat M et al. Neurol Res. 2022 (Jan 17). Doi: 10.1080/01616412.2021
Rimegepant lowers MMDs and tablet use and improves HRQoL in migraine
Key clinical point: Rimegepant on a patient treated as needed (PRN) basis reduces monthly migraine days (MMD) without increasing the monthly tablet use and improves health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with acute migraine.
Major finding: Rimegepant reduced the mean MMD from 10.9 days at baseline to 8.9 days by week 52 and led to an increase of 0.08 quality-adjusted life years. The mean monthly tablet use decreased from 7.9 tablets to 7.3 tablets between weeks 4-8 and 48-52.
Study details: This was a post hoc analysis of the phase 2/3 safety BHV3000-201 study including 1,044 patients with a ≥1-year history of migraine and ≥6 MMD who received 75 mg rimegepant up to once daily PRN for up to 52 weeks.
Disclosures: The study was sponsored by Biohaven Pharmaceuticals. CP Schreiber reported being a speaker for various organizations, including Biohaven. The rest of the authors are employees and stock/stock option owners of Biohaven or Broadstreet HEOR (funded by the former).
Source: Johnston K et al. J Headache Pain. 2022;23:10 (Jan 17). Doi: 10.1186/s10194-021-01378-5
Key clinical point: Rimegepant on a patient treated as needed (PRN) basis reduces monthly migraine days (MMD) without increasing the monthly tablet use and improves health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with acute migraine.
Major finding: Rimegepant reduced the mean MMD from 10.9 days at baseline to 8.9 days by week 52 and led to an increase of 0.08 quality-adjusted life years. The mean monthly tablet use decreased from 7.9 tablets to 7.3 tablets between weeks 4-8 and 48-52.
Study details: This was a post hoc analysis of the phase 2/3 safety BHV3000-201 study including 1,044 patients with a ≥1-year history of migraine and ≥6 MMD who received 75 mg rimegepant up to once daily PRN for up to 52 weeks.
Disclosures: The study was sponsored by Biohaven Pharmaceuticals. CP Schreiber reported being a speaker for various organizations, including Biohaven. The rest of the authors are employees and stock/stock option owners of Biohaven or Broadstreet HEOR (funded by the former).
Source: Johnston K et al. J Headache Pain. 2022;23:10 (Jan 17). Doi: 10.1186/s10194-021-01378-5
Key clinical point: Rimegepant on a patient treated as needed (PRN) basis reduces monthly migraine days (MMD) without increasing the monthly tablet use and improves health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with acute migraine.
Major finding: Rimegepant reduced the mean MMD from 10.9 days at baseline to 8.9 days by week 52 and led to an increase of 0.08 quality-adjusted life years. The mean monthly tablet use decreased from 7.9 tablets to 7.3 tablets between weeks 4-8 and 48-52.
Study details: This was a post hoc analysis of the phase 2/3 safety BHV3000-201 study including 1,044 patients with a ≥1-year history of migraine and ≥6 MMD who received 75 mg rimegepant up to once daily PRN for up to 52 weeks.
Disclosures: The study was sponsored by Biohaven Pharmaceuticals. CP Schreiber reported being a speaker for various organizations, including Biohaven. The rest of the authors are employees and stock/stock option owners of Biohaven or Broadstreet HEOR (funded by the former).
Source: Johnston K et al. J Headache Pain. 2022;23:10 (Jan 17). Doi: 10.1186/s10194-021-01378-5
Galcanezumab improves functioning and reduces disability in treatment-resistant migraine
Key clinical point: Galcanezumab improves functioning and decreases disability in patients with treatment-resistant migraine.
Main finding: At month 3, galcanezumab vs. placebo caused a greater improvement in the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (version 2.1 Role Function-Restrictive) (least-squares mean [LSM] change 23.19 vs. 10.66; P ≤ .0001] and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Level Visual Analog Scale (LSM change 3.38 vs. −0.086; P = .0277) scores and a greater reduction in Migraine Disability Assessment total scores (LSM chang, −21.10 vs. −3.30; P ≤ .0001).
Study details: Findings are from the phase 3b CONQUER trial including 462 adult patients with episodic or chronic migraine and no response to previous 2-4 migraine preventive treatment categories who were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with galcanezumab (n = 232) or placebo (n = 230) for 3 months followed by 3-month open-label treatment with galcanezumab.
Disclosures: Eli Lilly and Company sponsored the study. SJ Tepper and J Ailani declared receiving research grants, speaker's/advisory board member's honoraria, or institutional research funding for clinical trials from various sources, including Eli Lilly. The rest of the authors are employees and stockholders of Eli Lilly.
Source: Tepper SJ et al. Clin Drug Investig. 2022 (Jan 18). Doi: 10.1007/s40261-021-01115-5
Key clinical point: Galcanezumab improves functioning and decreases disability in patients with treatment-resistant migraine.
Main finding: At month 3, galcanezumab vs. placebo caused a greater improvement in the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (version 2.1 Role Function-Restrictive) (least-squares mean [LSM] change 23.19 vs. 10.66; P ≤ .0001] and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Level Visual Analog Scale (LSM change 3.38 vs. −0.086; P = .0277) scores and a greater reduction in Migraine Disability Assessment total scores (LSM chang, −21.10 vs. −3.30; P ≤ .0001).
Study details: Findings are from the phase 3b CONQUER trial including 462 adult patients with episodic or chronic migraine and no response to previous 2-4 migraine preventive treatment categories who were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with galcanezumab (n = 232) or placebo (n = 230) for 3 months followed by 3-month open-label treatment with galcanezumab.
Disclosures: Eli Lilly and Company sponsored the study. SJ Tepper and J Ailani declared receiving research grants, speaker's/advisory board member's honoraria, or institutional research funding for clinical trials from various sources, including Eli Lilly. The rest of the authors are employees and stockholders of Eli Lilly.
Source: Tepper SJ et al. Clin Drug Investig. 2022 (Jan 18). Doi: 10.1007/s40261-021-01115-5
Key clinical point: Galcanezumab improves functioning and decreases disability in patients with treatment-resistant migraine.
Main finding: At month 3, galcanezumab vs. placebo caused a greater improvement in the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (version 2.1 Role Function-Restrictive) (least-squares mean [LSM] change 23.19 vs. 10.66; P ≤ .0001] and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Level Visual Analog Scale (LSM change 3.38 vs. −0.086; P = .0277) scores and a greater reduction in Migraine Disability Assessment total scores (LSM chang, −21.10 vs. −3.30; P ≤ .0001).
Study details: Findings are from the phase 3b CONQUER trial including 462 adult patients with episodic or chronic migraine and no response to previous 2-4 migraine preventive treatment categories who were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with galcanezumab (n = 232) or placebo (n = 230) for 3 months followed by 3-month open-label treatment with galcanezumab.
Disclosures: Eli Lilly and Company sponsored the study. SJ Tepper and J Ailani declared receiving research grants, speaker's/advisory board member's honoraria, or institutional research funding for clinical trials from various sources, including Eli Lilly. The rest of the authors are employees and stockholders of Eli Lilly.
Source: Tepper SJ et al. Clin Drug Investig. 2022 (Jan 18). Doi: 10.1007/s40261-021-01115-5
Rheumatoid arthritis: Baricitinib more effective than TNF inhibitors in real world
Key clinical point: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), baricitinib showed better treatment responses than tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, whereas treatment response for tofacitinib was not significantly different vs. baricitinib or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD).
Major finding: At 1 year, TNFi vs. baricitinib showed lower European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (difference −4.3%; 95% CI −8.7% to 0.1%), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index improvement (difference −9.9%; 95% CI −14.4% to −5.4%), and Clinical Disease Activity Index remission (difference −6%; 95% CI −9.8% to −2.2%). Tofacitinib showed similar treatment responses vs. bDMARDs or baricitinib.
Study details: This was a nationwide cohort study involving patients with RA who initiated baricitinib (n = 1,420), tofacitinib (n = 316), abatacept (n = 1,050), interleukin-6 inhibitors (n = 849), rituximab (n = 1,101), or TNF inhibitors (n = 6,036).
Disclosures: This work was supported by the Swedish Research Council and others. J Askling, K Chatzidionysiou, and C Turesson reported receiving research grants and consulting and speaker fees from various sources. A Kastbom reported being employed by Sanofi.
Source: Barbulescu A et al. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2022 (Feb 3). Doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac068
Key clinical point: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), baricitinib showed better treatment responses than tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, whereas treatment response for tofacitinib was not significantly different vs. baricitinib or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD).
Major finding: At 1 year, TNFi vs. baricitinib showed lower European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (difference −4.3%; 95% CI −8.7% to 0.1%), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index improvement (difference −9.9%; 95% CI −14.4% to −5.4%), and Clinical Disease Activity Index remission (difference −6%; 95% CI −9.8% to −2.2%). Tofacitinib showed similar treatment responses vs. bDMARDs or baricitinib.
Study details: This was a nationwide cohort study involving patients with RA who initiated baricitinib (n = 1,420), tofacitinib (n = 316), abatacept (n = 1,050), interleukin-6 inhibitors (n = 849), rituximab (n = 1,101), or TNF inhibitors (n = 6,036).
Disclosures: This work was supported by the Swedish Research Council and others. J Askling, K Chatzidionysiou, and C Turesson reported receiving research grants and consulting and speaker fees from various sources. A Kastbom reported being employed by Sanofi.
Source: Barbulescu A et al. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2022 (Feb 3). Doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac068
Key clinical point: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), baricitinib showed better treatment responses than tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, whereas treatment response for tofacitinib was not significantly different vs. baricitinib or biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD).
Major finding: At 1 year, TNFi vs. baricitinib showed lower European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (difference −4.3%; 95% CI −8.7% to 0.1%), Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index improvement (difference −9.9%; 95% CI −14.4% to −5.4%), and Clinical Disease Activity Index remission (difference −6%; 95% CI −9.8% to −2.2%). Tofacitinib showed similar treatment responses vs. bDMARDs or baricitinib.
Study details: This was a nationwide cohort study involving patients with RA who initiated baricitinib (n = 1,420), tofacitinib (n = 316), abatacept (n = 1,050), interleukin-6 inhibitors (n = 849), rituximab (n = 1,101), or TNF inhibitors (n = 6,036).
Disclosures: This work was supported by the Swedish Research Council and others. J Askling, K Chatzidionysiou, and C Turesson reported receiving research grants and consulting and speaker fees from various sources. A Kastbom reported being employed by Sanofi.
Source: Barbulescu A et al. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2022 (Feb 3). Doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keac068
No link between vitamin D levels at birth and early adulthood RA risk
Key clinical point: Vitamin D concentration at birth was not associated with the risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in early adulthood.
Major finding: The risk of developing RA in individuals aged 18-33.9 years was not significantly different among those in the highest vs. lowest vitamin D quintile (adjusted hazard ratio 1.21; 95% CI 0.90-1.63).
Study details: This was a registry-based case-cohort study involving 805 patients with RA with onset in early adulthood and 2,416 individuals from a random subcohort.
Disclosures: This research was supported by the Danish Rheumatism Association and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Cardoso I et al. Nutrients. 2022;14(3):447 (Jan 20). Doi: 10.3390/nu14030447
Key clinical point: Vitamin D concentration at birth was not associated with the risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in early adulthood.
Major finding: The risk of developing RA in individuals aged 18-33.9 years was not significantly different among those in the highest vs. lowest vitamin D quintile (adjusted hazard ratio 1.21; 95% CI 0.90-1.63).
Study details: This was a registry-based case-cohort study involving 805 patients with RA with onset in early adulthood and 2,416 individuals from a random subcohort.
Disclosures: This research was supported by the Danish Rheumatism Association and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Cardoso I et al. Nutrients. 2022;14(3):447 (Jan 20). Doi: 10.3390/nu14030447
Key clinical point: Vitamin D concentration at birth was not associated with the risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in early adulthood.
Major finding: The risk of developing RA in individuals aged 18-33.9 years was not significantly different among those in the highest vs. lowest vitamin D quintile (adjusted hazard ratio 1.21; 95% CI 0.90-1.63).
Study details: This was a registry-based case-cohort study involving 805 patients with RA with onset in early adulthood and 2,416 individuals from a random subcohort.
Disclosures: This research was supported by the Danish Rheumatism Association and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Cardoso I et al. Nutrients. 2022;14(3):447 (Jan 20). Doi: 10.3390/nu14030447
Low disease activity tied to increased bone mineral density in RA
Key clinical point: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), low cumulative disease activity was associated with an increased femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD), irrespective of established osteoporosis risk factors.
Major finding: Low cumulative disease activity as measured by Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints with erythrocyte sedimentation rate was independently associated with higher femoral neck BMD compared with moderate/high disease activity (β 0.071; P = .020).
Study details: The findings come from an observational cohort study involving 161 patients with RA.
Disclosures: This study was funded by the Rheumatology Research Foundation Scientist Development Award, National Institute of Aging, and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Wysham KD et al. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2022;53:151972 (Jan 31). Doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2022.151972
Key clinical point: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), low cumulative disease activity was associated with an increased femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD), irrespective of established osteoporosis risk factors.
Major finding: Low cumulative disease activity as measured by Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints with erythrocyte sedimentation rate was independently associated with higher femoral neck BMD compared with moderate/high disease activity (β 0.071; P = .020).
Study details: The findings come from an observational cohort study involving 161 patients with RA.
Disclosures: This study was funded by the Rheumatology Research Foundation Scientist Development Award, National Institute of Aging, and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Wysham KD et al. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2022;53:151972 (Jan 31). Doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2022.151972
Key clinical point: In patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), low cumulative disease activity was associated with an increased femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD), irrespective of established osteoporosis risk factors.
Major finding: Low cumulative disease activity as measured by Disease Activity Score in 28 Joints with erythrocyte sedimentation rate was independently associated with higher femoral neck BMD compared with moderate/high disease activity (β 0.071; P = .020).
Study details: The findings come from an observational cohort study involving 161 patients with RA.
Disclosures: This study was funded by the Rheumatology Research Foundation Scientist Development Award, National Institute of Aging, and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Wysham KD et al. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2022;53:151972 (Jan 31). Doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2022.151972
DMARDs or corticosteroids use may not explain reduced risk for Parkinson disease in RA
Key clinical point: The use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) or corticosteroids did not affect the risk for Parkinson's disease (PD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), except for chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, which may be potentially associated with a reduced PD risk.
Major finding: At 3 years, the use of DMARDs or corticosteroids was not associated with the risk for PD, except for chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, which was associated with a decreased risk (adjusted odds ratio 0.74; 95% CI 0.56-0.97).
Study details: The findings come from the nested nationwide, case-control study including 315 cases with RA diagnosed at least 3 years before the diagnosis of PD. Cases were matched to 1,571 control participants without PD but with RA.
Disclosures: The study was funded by the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Paakinaho A et al. Neurology. 2022 (Jan 21). Doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000013303
Key clinical point: The use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) or corticosteroids did not affect the risk for Parkinson's disease (PD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), except for chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, which may be potentially associated with a reduced PD risk.
Major finding: At 3 years, the use of DMARDs or corticosteroids was not associated with the risk for PD, except for chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, which was associated with a decreased risk (adjusted odds ratio 0.74; 95% CI 0.56-0.97).
Study details: The findings come from the nested nationwide, case-control study including 315 cases with RA diagnosed at least 3 years before the diagnosis of PD. Cases were matched to 1,571 control participants without PD but with RA.
Disclosures: The study was funded by the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Paakinaho A et al. Neurology. 2022 (Jan 21). Doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000013303
Key clinical point: The use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) or corticosteroids did not affect the risk for Parkinson's disease (PD) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), except for chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, which may be potentially associated with a reduced PD risk.
Major finding: At 3 years, the use of DMARDs or corticosteroids was not associated with the risk for PD, except for chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, which was associated with a decreased risk (adjusted odds ratio 0.74; 95% CI 0.56-0.97).
Study details: The findings come from the nested nationwide, case-control study including 315 cases with RA diagnosed at least 3 years before the diagnosis of PD. Cases were matched to 1,571 control participants without PD but with RA.
Disclosures: The study was funded by the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Paakinaho A et al. Neurology. 2022 (Jan 21). Doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000013303