OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether analysis of the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population with post-randomisation exclusion of patients from analysis is associated with biased estimates of treatment effect compared to the conservative intention-to-treat (ITT) population.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Placebo-controlled, blinded randomised trials on biological or targeted interventions for rheumatoid arthritis were identified through a systematic search. Two authors independently extracted data. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to combine odds ratios as an expression of treatment effect and stratify according to the different analysis populations.

RESULTS: Seventy-two randomised trials were included and analysed (23,842 patients). Thirty trials analysed the ITT population, 37 analysed an mITT population, and 5 trials had an unclear analysis population. The treatment effect of active intervention compared to control, when based on mITT, was comparable to ITT (odds ratio 3.76 [95% confidence interval 3.09 to 4.57], and 3.47 [2.77 to 4.34]; comparison P=0.60).

CONCLUSION: We found no difference in the treatment effect between randomised trials using ITT and mITT analyses populations. This suggests that the mITT approach in rheumatoid arthritis trials investigating biological or targeted interventions does not introduce bias compared to ITT.

BACKGROUND: Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) spend a high proportion of their waking time in sedentary behaviour (SB) and have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Reduction of SB and increase in light intensity physical activity has been suggested as a means of improvement of health in patients with mobility problems. Short-term intervention studies have demonstrated that SB can be reduced by behavioural interventions in sedentary populations. To evaluate descriptively the feasibility of recruitment, randomisation, outcome assessments, retention and the acceptability of an individually tailored, theory-based behavioural intervention targeting reduction in daily sitting time in patients with RA.

METHODS: A randomised, controlled trial with two parallel groups. RA patients >18 years of age and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score < 2.5 were consecutively invited and screened for daily leisure time sitting > 4 h. The 16-week intervention included 1) three individual motivational counselling sessions and 2) individual text message reminders aimed at reducing daily sitting time. The control group was encouraged to maintain their usual lifestyles. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and after the 16 week intervention. Daily sitting time was measured using an ActivPAL3(TM) activity monitor. The study was not powered to show superiority; rather the objective was to focus on acceptability among patients and clinical health professionals.

RESULTS: In total, 107 patients were invited and screened before 20 met eligibility criteria and consented; reasons for declining study participation were mostly flares, lack of time and co-morbidities. One patient from the control group dropped out before end of intervention (due to a RA flare). Intervention participants completed all counselling sessions. All procedures regarding implementation of the trial protocol were feasible. The daily sitting time was reduced on average by 0.30 h in the intervention group unlike the control group that tended to increase it by 0.15 h after 16 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that an individually tailored behavioural intervention targeting reduction of SB was feasible and acceptable to patients with RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Danish Data Protection Agency (ref.nb. 711-1-08 - 20 March 2011), the Ethics Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark (ref.nb. H-2-2012-112- 17 October 2012), clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT01969604 - October 17 2013, retrospectively registered).

INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular morbidity is a major burden in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In this study, we compare the effect of a targeted, intensified, multifactorial intervention with that of conventional treatment of modifiable risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients with early RA fulfilling the 2010 American College of Rheumatology European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) criteria.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is a prospective, randomised, open label trial with blinded end point assessment and balanced randomisation (1:1) conducted in 10 outpatient clinics in Denmark. The primary end point after 5 years of follow-up is a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke and cardiac revascularisation. Secondary outcomes are: the proportion of patients achieving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <2.5 mmol/L, glycated haemoglobin <48 mmol/mol, blood pressure <140/90 mm  Hg for patients without diabetes and <130/80 mm Hg for patients with diabetes and normoalbuminuria (urinary albumin creatinine ratio <30 mg/g) after 1 year of follow-up and the proportion of patients in each treatment group achieving low RA disease activity after 1 year, defined as a disease activity score C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) <3.2 and a DAS28-CRP score <2.6 after 12, 24 and 60 months. Furthermore, all hospitalisations for acute and elective reasons will be adjudicated by the event committee after 12, 24 and 60 months. Three hundred treatment-naive patients with early RA will be randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either conventional treatment administered and monitored by their general practitioner according to national guidelines (control group) or a stepwise implementation administered and monitored in a quarterly rheumatological nurse-administered set-up of behaviour modification and pharmacological therapy targeting (1) hyperlipidaemia, (2) hypertension, (3) hyperglycaemia and (4) microalbuminuria (intervention group).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol is approved by the local ethics committee (DK-S-2014007) and The Danish Health and Medicines Authority. Dissemination will occur through presentations at National and International conferences and publications in international peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02246257.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this work was to assess whether neonatal levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) are associated with risk of developing type 1 diabetes before the age of 18 years.

METHODS: Two large-scale studies with different designs-a case-cohort and a case-control-were conducted using Danish national register data and biobank material. Weighted Cox regression and conditional logistic regression were used to calculate HRs and ORs, respectively. The concentration of 25(OH)D was assessed from neonatal dried blood spots using highly sensitive liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Quintiles of 25(OH)D3 were used in the main analyses.

RESULTS: The case-cohort study included 912 type 1 diabetes cases and 2866 individuals without type 1 diabetes born in Denmark between 1981 and 2002 and followed up until the end of 2012. The case-control study included 527 matched case-control pairs born between 1981 and 1999 and followed up until May 2004. Both studies found no association between 25(OH)D3 levels and later risk of developing type 1 diabetes. The neonatal total 25(OH)D levels in the studies were low: 46% (case-cohort study) and 51% (case-control study) of individuals had 25(OH)D levels <25 nmol/l.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Our two large-scale national studies showed that 25(OH)D3 levels around the time of birth were not associated with later type 1 diabetes risk. Whether higher levels of 25(OH)D3 during pregnancy, acquired by higher doses of supplementation than are recommended today in most countries, could protect the offspring against type 1 diabetes cannot be ruled out by the present studies.

AIM: To assess the effects of a functional and individualised exercise programme on gait biomechanics during walking in people with knee OA.

METHODS: Sixty participants were randomised to 12 weeks of facility-based functional and individualised neuromuscular exercise therapy (ET), 3 sessions per week supervised by trained physical therapists, or a no attention control group (CG). Three-dimensional gait analyses were used, from which a comprehensive list of conventional gait variables were extracted (totally 52 kinematic, kinetic and spatiotemporal variables). According to the protocol, the analyses were based on the 'Per-Protocol' population (defined as participants following the protocol with complete and valid gait analyses). Analysis of covariance adjusting for the level at baseline was used to determine differences between groups (95% CIs) in the changes from baseline at follow-up.

RESULTS: The per-protocol population included 46 participants (24 ET/22 CG). There were no group differences in the analysed gait variables, except for a significant group difference in the second peak knee flexor moment and second peak vertical ground reaction force.

CONCLUSION: While plausible we have limited confidence in the findings due to multiple statistical tests and lack of biomechanical logics. Therefore we conclude that a 12-week supervised individualised neuromuscular exercise programme has no effects on gait biomechanics. Future studies should focus on exercise programmes specifically designed to alter gait patterns, or include other measures of mobility, such as walking on stairs or inclined surfaces.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01545258.

BACKGROUND: The painDETECT questionnaire (PDQ) is a mechanism-based pain classification tool assigning patients to one of three categories depending on the quality of the experienced pain. Patients with non-nociceptive pain score high on the PDQ. The objective was to assess the proportions of the three PDQ classification groups in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to explore differences in clinical characteristics.

METHOD: RA patients initiating or escalating their RA therapy were included prospectively and underwent a thorough examination programme. Low (PDQ score < 13), medium (PDQ score 13-18), and high (PDQ score > 18) scores indicate nociceptive, unclear/possible neuropathic, or neuropathic pain mechanisms, respectively.

RESULTS: The 102 included patients were classified into the following PDQ classification groups: low = 65%, medium = 23%, and high = 12%. Patients in the medium and high PDQ groups scored worse on indicators of anxiety, depression, disability, mental health-related quality of life, pain, and fatigue. They also had more tender points and an RA disease activity score based on 28 joints (DAS28) where a higher fraction of the composite score pertained to non-inflammatory factors compared to patients in the low PDQ classification group. There were no differences in objective inflammatory indices across groups. Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that the tender joint count (TJC) and the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF36) mental component summary (MCS) score were independently associated with the PDQ score.

CONCLUSIONS: In patients initiating or intensifying medical treatment for their RA, non-nociceptive pain (PDQ score ≥ 13) is common. In these patients, the pain mechanisms result in increased disease activity scores on a non-inflammatory basis.