Exploration of Musculoskeletal Diseases

8 results in Exploration of Musculoskeletal Diseases

Sort by

Relevance

Relevance

Latest

Most Viewed

Most Downloaded

Most Cited

Open Access

Letter to the Editor

Dysbiosis as a common pathogenetic mechanism in psoriasis and gastrointestinal diseases

Christos Zavos

Published: January 10, 2025 Explor Musculoskeletal Dis. 2025;3:100778
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37349/emd.2025.100778

Full Text

PDF

View:219

Download:9

Times Cited: 0

Open Access

Perspective

Musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatologic diseases
Musculoskeletal ultrasound has become a valuable imaging tool in the diagnosis and management of rheumatologic disorders. Expertise in recognizing sonographic findings of pathology is the basis for [...] Read more.

Musculoskeletal ultrasound has become a valuable imaging tool in the diagnosis and management of rheumatologic disorders. Expertise in recognizing sonographic findings of pathology is the basis for its successful application in clinical use. This article will provide descriptions and a pictorial essay of ultrasound findings in common musculoskeletal manifestations of rheumatologic disorders.

Antje L Greenfield, Riti Kanesa-Thasan

Published: January 19, 2025 Explor Musculoskeletal Dis. 2025;3:100779
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37349/emd.2025.100779
This article belongs to the special issue Multifaceted Imaging in Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases

Full Text

PDF

View:201

Download:8

Times Cited: 0

Musculoskeletal ultrasound has become a valuable imaging tool in the diagnosis and management of rheumatologic disorders. Expertise in recognizing sonographic findings of pathology is the basis for its successful application in clinical use. This article will provide descriptions and a pictorial essay of ultrasound findings in common musculoskeletal manifestations of rheumatologic disorders.

Open Access

Review

Chronic pain, fibromyalgia, and long COVID
Chronic pain is a common problem in rheumatology. A distinction is made between nociceptive pain and nociplastic pain. Nociceptive pain is, for example, mechanistically explained by persistent infla [...] Read more.

Chronic pain is a common problem in rheumatology. A distinction is made between nociceptive pain and nociplastic pain. Nociceptive pain is, for example, mechanistically explained by persistent inflammation. Neuropathic pain is caused by nerve damage of various possible causes. In contrast, nociplastic pain is not due to tissue damage or a lesion in the somatosensory nervous system—at least not with the currently available techniques. Nociplastic pain is based on an altered perception of pain through modulation of stimulus processing. The concept of central sensitization, together with other neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, is considered to be the best explanation for such pain conditions. The syndrome of fibromyalgia (FM), considered to be due to central sensitization, plays a major role in rheumatology—both in terms of differential diagnosis and because the management of inflammatory rheumatic diseases can be made more difficult by the simultaneous presence of FM. During the coronavirus pandemic, persistent pain syndromes with similarities to FM were described following a COVID-19 infection. There is a growing scientific controversy as to whether the so-called long COVID syndrome (LCS) is a separate entity or just a variant of FM.

Jürgen Braun

Published: January 22, 2025 Explor Musculoskeletal Dis. 2025;3:100780
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37349/emd.2025.100780

Full Text

PDF

View:231

Download:7

Times Cited: 0

Chronic pain is a common problem in rheumatology. A distinction is made between nociceptive pain and nociplastic pain. Nociceptive pain is, for example, mechanistically explained by persistent inflammation. Neuropathic pain is caused by nerve damage of various possible causes. In contrast, nociplastic pain is not due to tissue damage or a lesion in the somatosensory nervous system—at least not with the currently available techniques. Nociplastic pain is based on an altered perception of pain through modulation of stimulus processing. The concept of central sensitization, together with other neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, is considered to be the best explanation for such pain conditions. The syndrome of fibromyalgia (FM), considered to be due to central sensitization, plays a major role in rheumatology—both in terms of differential diagnosis and because the management of inflammatory rheumatic diseases can be made more difficult by the simultaneous presence of FM. During the coronavirus pandemic, persistent pain syndromes with similarities to FM were described following a COVID-19 infection. There is a growing scientific controversy as to whether the so-called long COVID syndrome (LCS) is a separate entity or just a variant of FM.

Open Access

Short Communication

Patterns and inequities in pyogenic arthritis-related mortality in the United States from 1999–2020
Pyogenic arthritis (PA) related mortality trends have not been studied well across various demographics in the United States (US). This cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate these trends among the [...] Read more.

Pyogenic arthritis (PA) related mortality trends have not been studied well across various demographics in the United States (US). This cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate these trends among the US population aged ≥ 25 years from 1999–2020 using data from the CDC WONDER database. We identified all the deaths where PA was listed as the underlying or contributing cause of death, using the ICD-10 code M00. Age-adjusted mortality rates (AAMRs) were calculated per 1 million US population and the Joinpoint regression model was used to assess the annual mortality trends by calculating the annual percent change (APC) in AAMRs. Between 1999 and 2020, 13,965 total deaths occurred among US adults aged ≥ 25 years with an AAMR of 2.94. The overall AAMR of PA increased significantly from 1999 to 2020 with an APC of 2.01 (p < 0.01). Males and older adults had consistently higher AAMRs than their respective counterparts. Non-Hispanic (NH) American Indians/Alaska Natives and NH Blacks/African Americans had higher mortality rates compared with other racial groups. The Midwest had the highest overall AAMR, followed by the West, Northeast, and South regions. In conclusion, PA mortality has been on the rise and targeted interventions are warranted to reduce disproportionate mortality rates among vulnerable populations.

Usama Qamar ... Eisha Mazhar

Published: January 27, 2025 Explor Musculoskeletal Dis. 2025;3:100781
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37349/emd.2025.100781

Full Text

PDF

View:143

Download:8

Times Cited: 0

Pyogenic arthritis (PA) related mortality trends have not been studied well across various demographics in the United States (US). This cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate these trends among the US population aged ≥ 25 years from 1999–2020 using data from the CDC WONDER database. We identified all the deaths where PA was listed as the underlying or contributing cause of death, using the ICD-10 code M00. Age-adjusted mortality rates (AAMRs) were calculated per 1 million US population and the Joinpoint regression model was used to assess the annual mortality trends by calculating the annual percent change (APC) in AAMRs. Between 1999 and 2020, 13,965 total deaths occurred among US adults aged ≥ 25 years with an AAMR of 2.94. The overall AAMR of PA increased significantly from 1999 to 2020 with an APC of 2.01 (p < 0.01). Males and older adults had consistently higher AAMRs than their respective counterparts. Non-Hispanic (NH) American Indians/Alaska Natives and NH Blacks/African Americans had higher mortality rates compared with other racial groups. The Midwest had the highest overall AAMR, followed by the West, Northeast, and South regions. In conclusion, PA mortality has been on the rise and targeted interventions are warranted to reduce disproportionate mortality rates among vulnerable populations.

Open Access

Review

Optimizing development of anti-TNFα biosimilars based on 10 years’ experience
Routine regulatory requirements for large comparative efficacy trials (CETs) to support marketing approval of monoclonal antibody (mAb) biosimilars have been the focus of extensive debate in the las [...] Read more.

Routine regulatory requirements for large comparative efficacy trials (CETs) to support marketing approval of monoclonal antibody (mAb) biosimilars have been the focus of extensive debate in the last few years. This review examines the mounting evidence, accumulated over the past decade, focusing on relevant literature and data published in the European Product Assessment Reports (EPARs) for the fifteen anti-TNFα biosimilars approved to date. The potential for residual uncertainties that may require resolution through CETs following comparative physico-chemical, in-vitro potency, and single dose studies in healthy subjects is examined. It is noted that structural and physicochemical differences between biosimilars and reference products are detectable using modern analytical methods at levels well below those that could impact clinical outcomes, and that in vitro potency testing is fully capable of revealing clinically relevant differences. Additionally, comparative pharmacokinetic studies in healthy participants provide a sensitive assessment of potential differences in drug exposure and immunogenicity. The added value of CETs is further questioned in the light of the fact that anti-TNFα’s display a flat dose-response relationship, meaning that unlike cell-based assays, CETs have limited sensitivity to detect potency differences. Initial concerns about extrapolating data from rheumatoid arthritis studies to support marketing approval of other indications such as inflammatory bowel disease for which not all anti-TNFα’s are effective have been alleviated by post-approval studies. Additionally, as of the end of 2024, no cases where clinical efficacy data were necessary to resolve residual quality concerns have arisen following regulatory assessment of 56 mAb biosimilars and fusion proteins. CETs add significant cost and delay to the development of biosimilars and the time is now ripe to re-examine the need for these CET’s and for further evolution in regulatory thinking.

Cecil Nick

Published: February 08, 2025 Explor Musculoskeletal Dis. 2025;3:100782
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37349/emd.2025.100782
This article belongs to the special issue Biosimilars: State of the Art in the Treatment of Rheumatic Diseases

Full Text

PDF

View:519

Download:20

Times Cited: 0

Routine regulatory requirements for large comparative efficacy trials (CETs) to support marketing approval of monoclonal antibody (mAb) biosimilars have been the focus of extensive debate in the last few years. This review examines the mounting evidence, accumulated over the past decade, focusing on relevant literature and data published in the European Product Assessment Reports (EPARs) for the fifteen anti-TNFα biosimilars approved to date. The potential for residual uncertainties that may require resolution through CETs following comparative physico-chemical, in-vitro potency, and single dose studies in healthy subjects is examined. It is noted that structural and physicochemical differences between biosimilars and reference products are detectable using modern analytical methods at levels well below those that could impact clinical outcomes, and that in vitro potency testing is fully capable of revealing clinically relevant differences. Additionally, comparative pharmacokinetic studies in healthy participants provide a sensitive assessment of potential differences in drug exposure and immunogenicity. The added value of CETs is further questioned in the light of the fact that anti-TNFα’s display a flat dose-response relationship, meaning that unlike cell-based assays, CETs have limited sensitivity to detect potency differences. Initial concerns about extrapolating data from rheumatoid arthritis studies to support marketing approval of other indications such as inflammatory bowel disease for which not all anti-TNFα’s are effective have been alleviated by post-approval studies. Additionally, as of the end of 2024, no cases where clinical efficacy data were necessary to resolve residual quality concerns have arisen following regulatory assessment of 56 mAb biosimilars and fusion proteins. CETs add significant cost and delay to the development of biosimilars and the time is now ripe to re-examine the need for these CET’s and for further evolution in regulatory thinking.

Open Access

Original Article

Efficacy of switching from originator adalimumab to biosimilar adalimumab-AACF in patients with axial spondyloarthritis: a 12-month observational study
Aim: The use of anti-TNF drugs is well-established for treating axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). The introduction of biosimilars offers a more accessible alternative, but data on the switching of [...] Read more.

Aim: The use of anti-TNF drugs is well-established for treating axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). The introduction of biosimilars offers a more accessible alternative, but data on the switching of adalimumab biosimilars in the axSpA population remain somewhat controversial and are limited to SB5 and ABP 501 and to the European population. This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy of switching from originator adalimumab to the biosimilar adalimumab-AACF in Latin American axSpA patients over a 12-month period in a real-life analysis. Methods: This observational study included patients with axSpA who had been treated with originator adalimumab for at least three months and switched to the biosimilar. Disease activity parameters and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were assessed at baseline (T0) and compared at 6 (T6) and 12 months (T12) following the switch. Results: Twenty-eight patients were included, with a mean duration of originator adalimumab use of 87.6 months. Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS)-CRP remained stable when comparing T0 to T6 [1.56 (± 0.88) vs. 1.50 (± 0.82), P = 0.73] and T12 [1.56 (± 0.88) vs. 1.26 (± 0.86), P = 0.13]. A similar pattern was observed for ASDAS-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR; P > 0.05) and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI; P > 0.05). The rate of remission/low disease activity was consistent, recorded at 71.4% at baseline, 78.6% at T6 (P = 0.62) and 78.6% at T12 (P = 0.68). CRP levels did not show significant variation (P > 0.05) across time points. Notably, the one-year drug retention rate was 94.6%. Conclusions: This real-world study highlights for the first time the feasibility and efficacy of transitioning from originator adalimumab to biosimilar AACF in axSpA, providing support for its use in long-term management and offering enhanced accessibility without compromising therapeutic outcomes. These results add valuable Latin American data to the body of evidence on biosimilar integration into clinical practice.

Fanny Alcira Reyes Neira ... Andrea Yukie Shimabuco

Published: February 10, 2025 Explor Musculoskeletal Dis. 2025;3:100783
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37349/emd.2025.100783
This article belongs to the special issue Biosimilars: State of the Art in the Treatment of Rheumatic Diseases

Full Text

PDF

View:111

Download:6

Times Cited: 0

Aim: The use of anti-TNF drugs is well-established for treating axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). The introduction of biosimilars offers a more accessible alternative, but data on the switching of adalimumab biosimilars in the axSpA population remain somewhat controversial and are limited to SB5 and ABP 501 and to the European population. This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy of switching from originator adalimumab to the biosimilar adalimumab-AACF in Latin American axSpA patients over a 12-month period in a real-life analysis. Methods: This observational study included patients with axSpA who had been treated with originator adalimumab for at least three months and switched to the biosimilar. Disease activity parameters and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were assessed at baseline (T0) and compared at 6 (T6) and 12 months (T12) following the switch. Results: Twenty-eight patients were included, with a mean duration of originator adalimumab use of 87.6 months. Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS)-CRP remained stable when comparing T0 to T6 [1.56 (± 0.88) vs. 1.50 (± 0.82), P = 0.73] and T12 [1.56 (± 0.88) vs. 1.26 (± 0.86), P = 0.13]. A similar pattern was observed for ASDAS-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR; P > 0.05) and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI; P > 0.05). The rate of remission/low disease activity was consistent, recorded at 71.4% at baseline, 78.6% at T6 (P = 0.62) and 78.6% at T12 (P = 0.68). CRP levels did not show significant variation (P > 0.05) across time points. Notably, the one-year drug retention rate was 94.6%. Conclusions: This real-world study highlights for the first time the feasibility and efficacy of transitioning from originator adalimumab to biosimilar AACF in axSpA, providing support for its use in long-term management and offering enhanced accessibility without compromising therapeutic outcomes. These results add valuable Latin American data to the body of evidence on biosimilar integration into clinical practice.

Open Access

Short Communication

Transition from reference adalimumab to biosimilar SB5 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: sub-analysis of Spanish patients in the PROPER study
This sub-analysis of the PROPER study aimed to evaluate outcomes following the transition from reference adalimumab (ADL) to SB5 (Imraldi™) in routine clinical practice in Spanish patients with rh [...] Read more.

This sub-analysis of the PROPER study aimed to evaluate outcomes following the transition from reference adalimumab (ADL) to SB5 (Imraldi™) in routine clinical practice in Spanish patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Adult Spanish patients (n = 73) with RA who initiated SB5 as part of routine clinical practice following treatment with reference ADL were recruited. Outcome measures included persistence on SB5, clinical characteristics, and disease activity scores at the time of transition to SB5 treatment, clinical management over time, and safety. At Week 48, the Kaplan-Meier [95% confidence interval (CI)] estimate of the probability of persistence on SB5 after switching from reference ADL was 0.84 (0.73–0.90) and 83.6% (46/55) of patients were in remission or had low disease activity. The majority of patients [83.6% (61/73)] experienced no disease flare during the study period and reported that the injection was “simple or very simple” to administer (baseline: 66.7%; Week 48: 69.0%) and were generally “satisfied or very satisfied” with the duration of the injection. In total, 21 patients (21/73, 28.8%) reported at least one drug-related adverse event, which were mild in most cases (17/21, 80.9%). In a Spanish cohort of patients with RA transitioning from reference ADL to SB5, the probability of SB5 persistence was high and treatment effectiveness was maintained for up to 48 weeks. There were no new safety signals and SB5 was well tolerated. These findings suggest that there is no evidence to mitigate against transition from reference ADL to SB5 in patients with RA (Clinicaltrials.gov listing: NCT04089514).

Fernando Pérez-Ruiz ... Eugenio Chamizo Carmona

Published: February 10, 2025 Explor Musculoskeletal Dis. 2025;3:100784
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37349/emd.2025.100784
This article belongs to the special issue Biosimilars: State of the Art in the Treatment of Rheumatic Diseases

Full Text

PDF

View:168

Download:14

Times Cited: 0

This sub-analysis of the PROPER study aimed to evaluate outcomes following the transition from reference adalimumab (ADL) to SB5 (Imraldi™) in routine clinical practice in Spanish patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Adult Spanish patients (n = 73) with RA who initiated SB5 as part of routine clinical practice following treatment with reference ADL were recruited. Outcome measures included persistence on SB5, clinical characteristics, and disease activity scores at the time of transition to SB5 treatment, clinical management over time, and safety. At Week 48, the Kaplan-Meier [95% confidence interval (CI)] estimate of the probability of persistence on SB5 after switching from reference ADL was 0.84 (0.73–0.90) and 83.6% (46/55) of patients were in remission or had low disease activity. The majority of patients [83.6% (61/73)] experienced no disease flare during the study period and reported that the injection was “simple or very simple” to administer (baseline: 66.7%; Week 48: 69.0%) and were generally “satisfied or very satisfied” with the duration of the injection. In total, 21 patients (21/73, 28.8%) reported at least one drug-related adverse event, which were mild in most cases (17/21, 80.9%). In a Spanish cohort of patients with RA transitioning from reference ADL to SB5, the probability of SB5 persistence was high and treatment effectiveness was maintained for up to 48 weeks. There were no new safety signals and SB5 was well tolerated. These findings suggest that there is no evidence to mitigate against transition from reference ADL to SB5 in patients with RA (Clinicaltrials.gov listing: NCT04089514).

Open Access

Perspective

Perspective on clinical and imaging tools for early identification of temporomandibular joint involvement in juvenile idiopathic arthritis
The temporomandibular joint (TMJ) involvement is an underestimated feature of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) since it is usually asymptomatic at presentation for an undeterminable time. Late di [...] Read more.

The temporomandibular joint (TMJ) involvement is an underestimated feature of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) since it is usually asymptomatic at presentation for an undeterminable time. Late diagnosis of TMJ arthritis in JIA patients leads to delayed treatment, long-term orofacial disturbances, and impaired health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Therefore, the detection of TMJ involvement is fundamental and represents a challenge. This perspective presents state-of-the-art current initiatives and available tools for early diagnosis of TMJ arthritis in children with JIA. Standardized protocols and multidisciplinary efforts for improving clinical skills in the assessment of TMJ in JIA are presented and commented on. An overview of imaging efforts for early detection of TMJ involvement in JIA is also provided, with a critical review of the advantages and limitations of different techniques, imaging protocols, and scoring systems. The perspective offers insights into the correct use and improvement of available and potential tools for early identification of TMJ arthritis in JIA subjects who deserve timely multidisciplinary treatment, avoiding both underestimation and over-diagnosis of TMJ arthritis in routine clinical practice.

Silvia Magni-Manzoni

Published: February 11, 2025 Explor Musculoskeletal Dis. 2025;3:100785
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37349/emd.2025.100785
This article belongs to the special issue Multifaceted Imaging in Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases

Full Text

PDF

View:86

Download:4

Times Cited: 0

The temporomandibular joint (TMJ) involvement is an underestimated feature of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) since it is usually asymptomatic at presentation for an undeterminable time. Late diagnosis of TMJ arthritis in JIA patients leads to delayed treatment, long-term orofacial disturbances, and impaired health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Therefore, the detection of TMJ involvement is fundamental and represents a challenge. This perspective presents state-of-the-art current initiatives and available tools for early diagnosis of TMJ arthritis in children with JIA. Standardized protocols and multidisciplinary efforts for improving clinical skills in the assessment of TMJ in JIA are presented and commented on. An overview of imaging efforts for early detection of TMJ involvement in JIA is also provided, with a critical review of the advantages and limitations of different techniques, imaging protocols, and scoring systems. The perspective offers insights into the correct use and improvement of available and potential tools for early identification of TMJ arthritis in JIA subjects who deserve timely multidisciplinary treatment, avoiding both underestimation and over-diagnosis of TMJ arthritis in routine clinical practice.
- Submit a Manuscript
- Aims and Scope
- Editorial Board
- Author Instructions
- Article Type
  
  Review (2)
  
  Perspective (2)
  
  Short Communication (2)
  
  Original Article (1)
  
  Letter to the Editor (1)
  
  Year
  
  2025 (8)
  
  2024 (0)
  
  2023 (0)
  
  Volume
  
  Vol. 3 (2025)
  
  Vol. 2 (2024)
  
  Issue 6
  
  Issue 5
  
  Issue 4
  
  Issue 3
  
  Issue 2
  
  Issue 1
  
  Vol. 1 (2023)
  
  Issue 6
  
  Issue 5
  
  Issue 4
  
  Issue 3
  
  Issue 2
  
  Issue 1