Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an inflammatory autoimmune disease that causes chronic synovitis, resulting in progressive joint destruction and functional disability and affects approximately 400,000 people in the UK. This real-world study aimed to describe the characteristics, treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of patients who received abatacept in UK clinical practice. Methods This was a multi-centre, retrospective, observational study of patients with RA treated with abatacept at four UK centres between 01 January 2013 and 31 December 2017. Data were collected from medical records of each patient from the index date (date of first bDMARD initiation) until the most recent visit, death or end of study (31 December 2017). Results In total, 213 patients were included in the study. Patients received up to eight lines of therapy (LOTs). Treatment with abatacept, or any other bDMARD, was associated with reductions in DAS28-ESR and DAS28-CRP scores at 6 and 12 months. The distribution of EULAR responses (good/moderate/no response) tended to be more favourable for patients when receiving abatacept than when receiving other bDMARDs (22.8%/41.3%/35.9% versus 16.6%/41.4%/42.1% at 6 months, and 27.9%/36.1%/36.1% versus 21.2%/34.5%/44.2% at 12 months). Patients receiving abatacept at LOT1 ( n = 68) spent significantly longer on treatment compared with patients receiving other bDMARDs (53.4 vs. 17.4 months; p < 0.01); a similar trend was observed for LOT2. Among patients who discontinued after 6 months, a greater proportion experienced infection requiring antibiotics when receiving other bDMARDs compared to those receiving abatacept. Conclusions RA patients who received bDMARDs, including abatacept, experienced reduced disease activity. When receiving abatacept as first or second line of therapy, patients persisted with treatment significantly longer than those receiving other bDMARDs.

Abstract Objective The ACT-MOVE study assessed the real-world efficacy and safety of s.c. tocilizumab (TCZ-SC), provided as monotherapy or in combination with conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) over 1 year, in patients with RA and an inadequate response to csDMARD therapy and/or first TNF inhibitor. Methods In this UK multicentre, open-label phase IIIb study, patients received TCZ-SC 162 mg once weekly for 52 weeks as monotherapy or with csDMARDs. Efficacy and safety were evaluated at baseline, weeks 2 and 4 and every 4 weeks thereafter up to week 52. Results Of 161 patients who received at least one dose of TCZ-SC, 21 (13.0%) received TCZ-SC alone and 140 (87.0%) TCZ-SC with a csDMARD(s). From baseline to week 52, there was a mean decrease in DAS28-ESR score among all patients (−3.68), and within monotherapy (−3.75) and combination therapy (−3.67) groups. The proportion of patients who achieved DAS28 clinical remission (DAS28-ESR <2.6) at week 52 was 75.4% (95% CI 66.8, 82.8). At the same time point, ≥80% of patients who remained on TCZ-SC achieved DAS28 clinical remission or had low disease activity (DAS28-ESR ≥2.6 and ≤3.2). Overall, 6.2% of patients had at least one serious adverse event (10.2/100 patient-years), and there was one death; 11.2% of patients discontinued owing to adverse events. Conclusion TCZ-SC was effective and tolerated in a real-world setting over 1 year. The efficacy of TCZ-SC was similar whether given as monotherapy or with csDMARDs; its safety profile was consistent with that previously established. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02046603.

Individuals with serum antibodies to citrullinated protein antigens (ACPA), rheumatoid factor, and symptoms, such as inflammatory joint pain, are at high risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis. In the arthritis prevention in the pre-clinical phase of rheumatoid arthritis with abatacept (APIPPRA) trial, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and acceptability of treating high risk individuals with the T-cell co-stimulation modulator abatacept. The APIPPRA study was a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, parallel, placebo-controlled, phase 2b clinical trial done in 28 hospital-based early arthritis clinics in the UK and three in the Netherlands. Participants (aged ≥18 years) at risk of rheumatoid arthritis positive for ACPA and rheumatoid factor with inflammatory joint pain were recruited. Exclusion criteria included previous episodes of clinical synovitis and previous use of corticosteroids or disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated permuted block randomisation (block sizes of 2 and 4) stratified by sex, smoking, and country, to 125 mg abatacept subcutaneous injections weekly or placebo for 12 months, and then followed up for 12 months. Masking was achieved by providing four kits (identical in appearance and packaging) with pre-filled syringes with coded labels of abatacept or placebo every 3 months. The primary endpoint was the time to development of clinical synovitis in three or more joints or rheumatoid arthritis according to American College of Rheumatology and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology 2010 criteria, whichever was met first. Synovitis was confirmed by ultrasonography. Follow-up was completed on Jan 13, 2021. All participants meeting the intention-to-treat principle were included in the analysis. This trial was registered with EudraCT (2013–003413–18). Between Dec 22, 2014, and Jan 14, 2019, 280 individuals were evaluated for eligibility and, of 213 participants, 110 were randomly assigned to abatacept and 103 to placebo. During the treatment period, seven (6%) of 110 participants in the abatacept group and 30 (29%) of 103 participants in the placebo group met the primary endpoint. At 24 months, 27 (25%) of 110 participants in the abatacept group had progressed to rheumatoid arthritis, compared with 38 (37%) of 103 in the placebo group. The estimated proportion of participants remaining arthritis-free at 12 months was 92·8% (SE 2·6) in the abatacept group and 69·2% (4·7) in the placebo group. Kaplan–Meier arthritis-free survival plots over 24 months favoured abatacept (log-rank test p=0·044). The difference in restricted mean survival time between groups was 53 days (95% CI 28–78; p<0·0001) at 12 months and 99 days (95% CI 38–161; p=0·0016) at 24 months in favour of abatacept. During treatment, abatacept was associated with improvements in pain scores, functional wellbeing, and quality-of-life measurements, as well as low scores of subclinical synovitis by ultrasonography, compared with placebo. However, the effects were not sustained at 24 months. Seven serious adverse events occurred in the abatacept group and 11 in the placebo group, including one death in each group deemed unrelated to treatment. Therapeutic intervention during the at-risk phase of rheumatoid arthritis is feasible, with acceptable safety profiles. T-cell co-stimulation modulation with abatacept for 12 months reduces progression to rheumatoid arthritis, with evidence of sustained efficacy beyond the treatment period, and with no new safety signals. Bristol Myers Squibb.

This thesis addresses the question: ‘can architecture be complicit?’ The research is structured as a progressively emerging body of work that has evolved through two distinct stages of research development. The notion of complicity in architecture is addressed through events related to apartheid human rights violations at John Vorster Police Station in Johannesburg, South Africa , and through a mutually supportive body of drawings which employing design and research-led methodologies. The work explores how design and architectural representation might be deployed to uncover important but often obscured themes surrounding torture and complicity in the built environment. The approach is seen as experimental, engaging with both conventional framing of philosophical ideas around both ethics and aesthetics and with questions around how active design production can contribute to new research trajectories and avenues of architectural production. The thesis aims to contribute to a growing body of knowledge that actively addresses space and the role of architecture in trauma, and has resulted in a substantiation to the claim that architecture can indeed be complicit. The work develops the question of complicity as an open research initiative and encourages further engagement.

Objectives The aim was to evaluate retention rates for secukinumab in patients with active PsA or radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA) treated in routine UK clinical practice. Methods SERENA (CAIN457A3403) is an ongoing, non-interventional, international study of patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis, active PsA or active r-axSpA, who had received secukinumab for ≥16 weeks before enrolment. The primary objective of this interim analysis was to assess treatment retention rates in patients with PsA or r-axSpA who were enrolled and followed for ≥2 years at centres in the UK. The safety analysis set includes all patients who received at least one dose of secukinumab. The target population set includes all patients who fulfilled the patient selection criteria. Results The safety set comprised 189 patients (PsA, n = 81; r-axSpA, n = 108), and the target population set comprised 183 patients (PsA, n = 78; r-axSpA, n = 105). In the safety set, 107 patients (45 of 81 with PsA and 62 of 108 with r-axSpA) had previously received a biologic agent. Retention rates were similar between patients with PsA and r-axSpA after 1 year (PsA 91.0%, 95% CI: 84.0, 98.0; r-axSpA 89.2%, 95% CI: 82.7, 95.7) and 2 years (PsA 77.6%, 95% CI: 67.6, 87.7; r-axSpA 76.2%, 95% CI: 67.4, 85.0) of observation. Overall, 17.5% of patients (33 of 189) experienced at least one treatment-related adverse event, and 12.7% of patients (24 of 189) discontinued secukinumab because of adverse events. Conclusion This analysis of real-world data from the UK demonstrates high retention rates for secukinumab over 2 years in patients with PsA or r-axSpA, with a favourable safety profile. Lay Summary What does this mean for patients? Secukinumab is a medication that can be used to treat patients with severe psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Some patients may ultimately stop taking secukinumab for many potential reasons, however there is little information published on how many actually do this. SERENA is a study examining secukinumab in patients with PsA or axSpA. This article describes the portion of the SERENA study that looked specifically at patients treated in the UK. Patients who had taken secukinumab for at least 16 weeks before joining the SERENA study were assessed over at least 2 years. In total, 194 patients (82 with PsA and 112 with axSpA) took part at UK centres. Secukinumab was still being taken by 90% of patients after 1 year and 77% after 2 years. In most patients, secukinumab continued to reduce pain and swelling over the 2 years of observation. Overall, 17.5% of patients had at least one side effect, and 12.7% of patients stopped taking secukinumab because of side effects. The UK results show that continuing to take secukinumab leads to sustained benefits for patients, and is well tolerated.

Objectives To evaluate retention, efficacy, and safety of subcutaneous (SC) abatacept over 2 years in patients with moderate-to-severe RA in the A batacept S ub C utane O us in R outine clinical practic E (ASCORE) study. Methods Patients with RA who initiated SC abatacept 125 mg once weekly were enrolled in the international, observational, prospective multicentre ASCORE study into biologic-naïve or ≥ 1 prior biologic failure cohorts. Primary endpoint: abatacept retention rate at 2 years. Secondary endpoints: proportion of patients with good/moderate EULAR response rates based on DAS28 (ESR), low disease activity and/or remission according to DAS28 (ESR; ≤ 3.2/ < 2.6), SDAI (≤ 11/ ≤ 3.3), CDAI (≤ 10/ ≤ 2.8), and Boolean criteria. Retention rate by baseline serostatus was evaluated post hoc. Results Overall, 47% of patients remained on abatacept for 2 years, irrespective of treatment line. Higher abatacept retention rates were associated with lower prior biologic exposure. Generally, clinical outcomes showed that the proportion of patients with low disease activity/remission was higher in biologic-naïve patients (vs biologic-failure) and similar in those with 1 and ≥ 2 prior biologic failures. In patients on treatment at 2 years, good/moderate EULAR response rates of ~ 80% were consistently noted irrespective of prior biologic exposure. Across treatment lines, retention was greater in patients with seropositive (vs seronegative) RA. Patients with rheumatoid factor/anti-citrullinated protein antibody single-positive RA who were bio-naïve had higher retention than patients who were bio-experienced. Conclusions In the ASCORE study, SC abatacept retention was 47% at 2 years with good clinical outcomes and was well-tolerated in the real-world setting. Abatacept retention and clinical response rates were higher in patients who received abatacept as an earlier- versus later-line biologic drug treatment and in those with seropositive RA. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02090556.

The global and South African financial markets landscape has changed and grown over the past 20 years, with a greater number of institutions offering Shariah-compliant products to Muslim individuals and investors. This has resulted from more investors seeking to align their wealth creation with their religious belief system. Shariah imposes certain restrictions and limitations on persons on members of the faith. This article aims to examine how the South African Shariah-compliant mutual funds perform relative to the conventional markets.This minor dissertation empirically investigates the performance of Shariah-compliant funds to conventional funds for the period 01 April 2012 to 30 March 2017. Specifically, the analysis is focused on three objectives. Firstly, the Shariah funds compared to their own respective and proxy benchmarks using simple measures of performance. Secondly, the Shariah funds compared to proxy benchmarks using risk-adjusted measures of performance including the Sharpe ratio, Treynor ratio, Information ratio and Jensen's Alpha. Lastly, Shariah indices relative to traditional market indices are investigated.Twenty-two funds were analysed in the study, all domiciled in South Africa. The funds were split over the five ASISA categories. The study found that multi-asset and income funds underperformed during the period in both the simple and risk-adjusted basis. Equity funds performed on par with the conventional benchmarks on the simple and risk-adjusted basis. REITs and global equity outperformed on both measures. The final empirical examination found that South African Shariah indices underperformed against the traditional market indices for the period.