Rheumatology

Sophia Auld
Clinical Articles iconClinical Articles

For the first time since 2017, the Osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis and management in postmenopausal women and men over 50 years of age guidelines have been updated to reflect recent evidence, expert consensus, and drug developments...

Expert/s: Sophia Auld
Emeritus Prof Alastair Goss
Podcasts iconPodcasts

TMD is a disorder that has myogenous, psychogenic and autogenous components

Emeritus Prof Alastair Goss
Podcasts iconPodcasts

Reducing the risk of medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw in those on antiresorptive drugs who require dental procedures

Dr Richard Prince
Podcasts iconPodcasts

Know your patient’s BMD; FRAX fracture risk calculator helps to refine risk

Healthed
Clinical Articles iconClinical Articles
Expert/s: Healthed
Prof David Hunter
Monographs iconMonographs

This article discusses the modern guidelines concerning the management of osteoarthritis of the hip and knee.

Kevin Davies, Jessica Eccles & Neil Harrison
Clinical Articles iconClinical Articles

Fibromyalgia is something of a mystery. It can’t be detected with scans or blood tests, yet it causes lifelong pain for millions of people. The disease mainly affects women (about 75-90% of cases), causing pain all over the body. Because not all healthcare professionals are adept at identifying and diagnosing fibromyalgia, reported rates of the condition vary greatly from country to country. In China, it affects only 0.8% of people, in France around 1.5%, in Canada 3.3%, and in Turkey 8.8%. Estimates in the US range from 2.2% to 6.4%, and in Russia, about 2% of the population is affected. People with the condition are often diagnosed if they have longstanding muscle pain, bone or joint pain and fatigue. Fibromyalgia can also cause insomnia, “brain fog”, some symptoms of depression or anxiety, as well as a range of other complaints, including irritable bowel syndrome and headache. Many patients are also hypermobile (“double-jointed”), and there is some overlap with chronic fatigue syndrome (also known as ME). Guidelines from the American College of Rheumatology make it clear that the diagnosis should be made using defined criteria based on the “widespread pain index” (which scores the number of painful regions out of 19) coupled with a symptom severity scale. The diagnosis also takes fatigue, generalised pain, unrefreshing sleep and cognitive symptoms into account. It doesn’t matter if the patient has another rheumatic disease, they can still be diagnosed with fibromyalgia. The scoring system, recommended by the American College of Rheumatology, is often used in clinical trials, but in the clinic, most doctors rely on detecting tender points in specific places and on excluding other medical conditions, including rheumatic conditions. Unlike say, rheumatoid arthritis or lupus, the tests do not show clear evidence of inflammation or autoimmunity (when the body’s immune system attacks itself) and scans are normal. The lack of inflammation or structural abnormality in muscles or joints – aside from making diagnosis difficult – is the main reason there are no widely accepted or effective treatments. In rheumatic diseases, where we understand the mechanisms that underlie the condition, we have the most effective treatments. In rheumatoid arthritis, for example, we know that much of the inflammation is caused by a cell-signalling protein (cytokine) called tumour necrosis factor and that blocking the activity of this protein switches off the disease in most patients. A number of possible mechanisms have been proposed in fibromyalgia, including abnormal muscle metabolism, reduced levels of steroid hormones such as cortisol, or abnormal small nerve fibres. But these abnormalities aren’t found in all patients with the condition. As such, they can’t be used as part of a diagnostic test, nor can they help develop treatments. Some experts have suggested that fibromyalgia may be related to abnormalities in the autonomic nervous system – the part of the nervous system that controls bodily functions, such as heart rate and blood pressure – and how the brain responds to pain signals and reacts to external stressors (such as infections). But there is currently no hard evidence to back up this theory. Looking for clues To fill in some of the gaps in our knowledge about this devastating condition, our research team at Brighton and Sussex Medical School is investigating the potential role of the autonomic nervous system and inflammation in fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome. For our study, we have two groups of patients: one with pain as the main symptom and the other with fatigue as the main symptom. We also have matched controls – people without the disease, but otherwise similar characteristics – to make meaningful comparisons. The study is in two parts. First, we will test the patients’ autonomic nervous system using a tilt-table. This involves tilting the person head downwards to see how well their body adapts to this change in posture by changing heart rate and blood pressure (both of which are monitored during the test).Second, we will stimulate patients’ immune systems with a typhoid vaccine (the normal type used in travellers) and perform magnetic resonance brain scans to look for changes in blood flow and also measure the levels of “inflammatory mediators” (the chemicals the body produces in response to stimuli of this type), to see whether these are higher in the fibromyalgia patients. Our study should, for the first time, help us to address the question of whether there really is an abnormal brain response to inflammation or infection in these patient groups and enable us to explore the relationship between the abnormal functioning of the autonomic nervous system and fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome. Fibromyalgia rarely goes away and treatment options are limited. Only by developing a proper understanding of the disease processes underlying this condition will doctors be able to make a clear, positive diagnosis, and most importantly, offer effective therapy.   Disclosure Statement Kevin Davies receives funding from AR-UK. Jessica Eccles receives funding from Academy of Medical Sciences, National Institute of Health Research, MQ Neil Harrison receives funding from the Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council (MRC), Arthritis Research UK, and Janssen Pharmaceuticals.

Dr Daman Langguth
Clinical Articles iconClinical Articles

Research in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) over the past 10 years has gained significant ground in both pathophysiological and clinical understanding. It is now known that early aggressive therapy within the first three months of the development of joint symptoms decreases the chance of developing severe disease, both clinically and radiologically. To enable this early diagnosis, there has been considerable effort made to discover serological markers of disease. Around 80% of RA patients become rheumatoid factor positive (IgM RF), though this can take many years to occur. In other words, IgM RF (hereafter called RF) has low sensitivity in the early stages of RA. Furthermore, patients with other inflammatory diseases (including Sjögren’s syndrome, chronic viral and bacterial infections) may also be positive for RF, and thus RF has a relatively low specificity for RA. The RF is, therefore, not an ideal test in the early detection and confirmation of RA. There has been an on-going search for an auto-antigen in RA over the past 30 years. It has been known that senescent cells display antigens not present on other cells, and that RA patients may make antibodies against them. This was first reported with the anti-perinuclear factor (APF) antibodies directed against senescent buccal mucosal cells in 1964, but this test was challenging to perform and interpret. These cells were later found to contain filament aggregating protein (filaggrin). Subsequently, in 1979, antibodies directed against keratin (anti-keratin antibodies, AKA) in senescent oesophageal cells were discovered. In 1994, another antibody named anti-Sa was discovered that reacted against modified vimentin in mesenchymal cells. In the late1990s, antibodies directed against citrullinated peptides were ‘discovered’. In fact, we now know that all of the aforementioned antibodies detect similar antigens. When cells grow old, some of the structural proteins undergo citrullination under the direction of cellular enzymes. Arginine residues undergo deamination to form the non-standard amino acid citrulline. Citrullinated peptides fit better into the HLA-DR4 molecules that are strongly associated with RA development, severity and prognosis. It is also known that many types of citrullinated peptides are present in the body, both in and outside joints. It has been determined that sera from individual RA patients contain antibodies that react against different citrullinated peptides, but these individuals’ antibodies do not react against all possible citrullinated peptides. Thus, to improve the sensitivity of the citrullinated peptide assays, cyclic citrullinated peptides (CCP) have been artificially generated to mimic a range of conformational epitopes present in vivo. It is these artificial peptides that are used in the second generation anti-CCP assays. Sullivan Nicolaides Pathology uses the Abbott Architect assay which is standardised against the Axis-Shield, Dundee UK, second generation CCP assay. False positive CCP antibodies have recently been reported to occur in acute viral (e.g. EBV, HIV) and some atypical bacterial (Q Fever) seroconversions. The antibodies may be present for a few months after seroconversion, but do not predict inflammatory arthritis in these individuals.

Anti-CCP assays

CCP antibodies alone give a sensitivity of around 66% in early RA, similar to RF, though they have a much higher specificity of >95% (compared with around 80% for RF). The combination of anti-CCP and RF tests is now considered to be the ‘gold standard’ in the early detection of RA. Combining RF with anti-CCP enables approximately 80% (i.e. 80% sensitivity) of RA patients to be detected in the early phase (less than sixmonths duration) of this disease. The presence of anti-CCP antibodies has also been shown to predict RA patients who will go on to develop more severe joint disease, both radiologically and clinically. They also appear to be a better marker of disease severity than RF. Anti-CCP antibodies have also been shown to be present prior to the development of clinical disease, and thus may predict the development of RA in patients with uncharacterised recent onset inflammatory arthritis. At present, it is not known whether monitoring the level of these antibodies will be useful as a marker of disease control, though some data in patients treated with biologic (e.g. etanercept, infliximab agents) suggests they may be useful. It has not been determined whether the absolute levels of CCP antibodies allow further disease risk stratification. Our pathology laboratories reports CCP antibodies in a quantitative fashion – normal less than 5 U/mL with a range of up to 2000 U/mL. References
  1. ACR Position statement on anti-CCP antibodies http://www.rheumatology.org/publications hotline/1003anticcp.asp.
  2. Forslind K, Ahlmen M, Eberhardt K et al. Prediction of radiologic outcome in early rheumatoid arthritis in clinical practice: role of antibodies to citrullinated peptides (anti-CCP). Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63:1090-5.
  3. Huizinga TWJ, Amos CI, van der Helm-van Mil AHM et al. Refining the complex rheumatoid arthritis phenotype based on specificity of the HLA-DRB1 Shared epitope for antibodies to citrullinated proteins. Arthritis Rheum 2005; 52:3433-8.
  4. Lee DM, Schur PH. Clinical Utility of the anti-CCP assay in patients with rheumatic disease. Ann Rheum Dis 2003; 62:870-4.
  5. Van Gaalen FA, Linn-Rasker SP, van Venrooij Wj et al. Autoantibodies to cyclic citrullinated peptides predict progression to rheumatoid arthritis in patients with undifferentiated arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2004;50: 709-15.
  6. Zendman AJW, van Venrooij WJ, Prujin GJM. Use and significance of anti-CCP autoantibodies in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology 2006; 46:20-5.

General Practice Pathology is a new regular column each authored by an Australian expert pathologist on a topic of particular relevance and interest to practising GPs. The authors provide this editorial, free of charge as part of an educational initiative developed and coordinated by Sonic Pathology.