Mease Philip
Seattle Rheumatology Associates, Swedish Medical Center, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2006;64(1-2):25-31.
Psoriatic arthritis is an inflammatory arthritis occurring in up to 30% of patients with psoriasis. Its clear distinction from rheumatoid arthritis has been described clinically, genetically, and immunohistologically. Updated classification criteria have been recently derived from a large international study. Key pathophysiologic cellular processes are being elucidated, increasing our understanding of potential targets of therapy. Therapies that target cells, such as activated T cells, and proinflammatory cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha), are rational to pursue. Outcome measures have been "borrowed" from rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis studies. A variety of domains are assessed including joints, skin, enthesium, dactylitis, spine, function, quality of life, and imaging assessment of disease activity and damage. The performance qualities of outcome measures in these various domains is being evaluated by the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA), and improved measures are being developed and validated specifically for psoriatic arthritis. Traditional therapies for psoriatic arthritis have included nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, oral immunomodulatory drugs, topical creams, and light therapy. These therapies have been helpful in controlling both musculoskeletal and dermatologic aspects of the disease, but they may not be fully effective in all disease domains, may eventually show diminished benefit, and may produce treatment-limiting toxicities. In the past several years, use of biologic agents has generally yielded greater benefit across more domains, yielding significant and enduring benefits for clinical manifestations, function, and quality of life, and especially with the anti-TNF agents, inhibition of structural damage. Adverse effects with these agents can be significant but are usually manageable. Cost is also significant, but cost-effectiveness analysis is demonstrating reasonable trade-off between cost and benefit.
银屑病关节炎是一种炎症性关节炎,高达30%的银屑病患者会发生此病。临床上、基因层面以及免疫组织学层面均已描述了其与类风湿关节炎的明显区别。近期一项大型国际研究得出了更新的分类标准。关键的病理生理细胞过程正在得到阐明,增进了我们对潜在治疗靶点的理解。针对细胞(如活化T细胞)以及促炎细胞因子(如肿瘤坏死因子α)的疗法是合理的研究方向。疗效评估指标是从类风湿关节炎和银屑病研究中“借鉴”而来的。评估的领域多种多样,包括关节、皮肤、肌腱附着点、指(趾)炎、脊柱、功能、生活质量以及疾病活动度和损伤的影像学评估。银屑病和银屑病关节炎研究与评估小组(GRAPPA)正在评估这些不同领域中疗效评估指标的性能质量,并且正在专门针对银屑病关节炎研发和验证改进的评估指标。银屑病关节炎的传统治疗方法包括非甾体类抗炎药、口服免疫调节药物、外用乳膏和光疗。这些疗法有助于控制疾病的肌肉骨骼和皮肤方面,但在所有疾病领域可能并非完全有效,最终可能显示出疗效减弱,并且可能产生限制治疗的毒性。在过去几年中,生物制剂的使用通常在更多领域产生了更大的益处,对临床表现、功能和生活质量产生了显著且持久的益处,尤其是使用抗TNF药物时,能抑制结构损伤。这些药物的不良反应可能很严重,但通常是可控的。成本也很高,但成本效益分析表明成本与效益之间存在合理的权衡。