To detail the unmet clinical and scientific needs in the field of rheumatology. After a 2-year hiatus due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the 22nd annual international Advances in Targeted Therapies... Show moreTo detail the unmet clinical and scientific needs in the field of rheumatology. After a 2-year hiatus due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the 22nd annual international Advances in Targeted Therapies meeting brought together more than 100 leading basic scientists and clinical researchers in rheumatology, immunology, epidemiology, molecular biology and other specialties. Breakout sessions were convened with experts in five rheumatological disease-specific groups including: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus and connective tissue diseases (CTDs). In each group, experts were asked to identify and prioritise current unmet needs in clinical and translational research, as well as highlight recent progress in meeting formerly identified unmet needs. Clinical trial design innovation was emphasised across all disease states. Within RA, developing therapies and trials for refractory disease patients remained among the most important identified unmet needs and within lupus and spondyloarthritis the need to account for disease endotypes was highlighted. The RA group also identified the need to better understand the natural history of RA, pre-RA states and the need ultimately for precision medicine. In CTD generally, experts focused on the need to better identify molecular, cellular and clinical signals of early and undifferentiated disease in order to identify novel drug targets. There remains a strong need to develop therapies and therapeutic strategies for those with treatment-refractory disease. Increasingly it is clear that we need to better understand the natural history of these diseases, including their 'predisease' states, and identify molecular signatures, including at a tissue level, which can facilitate disease diagnosis and treatment. As these unmet needs in the field of rheumatic diseases have been identified based on consensus of expert clinicians and scientists in the field, this document may serve individual researchers, institutions and industry to help prioritise their scientific activities. Show less
Basu, N.; Watts, R.; Bajema, I.; Baslund, B.; Bley, T.; Boers, M.; ... ; Luqmani, R. 2010
Objectives The systemic vasculitides are multiorgan diseases where early diagnosis and treatment can significantly improve outcomes. Robust nomenclature reduces diagnostic delay. However, key... Show moreObjectives The systemic vasculitides are multiorgan diseases where early diagnosis and treatment can significantly improve outcomes. Robust nomenclature reduces diagnostic delay. However, key aspects of current nomenclature are widely perceived to be out of date, these include disease definitions, classification and diagnostic criteria. Therefore, the aim of the present work was to identify deficiencies and provide contemporary points to consider for the development of future definitions and criteria in systemic vasculitis. Methods The expert panel identified areas of concern within existing definitions/criteria. Consequently, a systematic literature review was undertaken looking to address these deficiencies and produce 'points to consider' in accordance with standardised European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) operating procedures. In the absence of evidence, expert consensus was used. Results There was unanimous consensus for re-evaluating existing definitions and developing new criteria. A total of 17 points to consider were proposed, covering 6 main areas: biopsy, laboratory testing, diagnostic radiology, nosology, definitions and research agenda. Suggestions to improve and expand current definitions were described including the incorporation of anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibody and aetiological factors, where known. The importance of biopsy in diagnosis and exclusion of mimics was highlighted, while equally emphasising its problems. Thus, the role of alternative diagnostic tools such as MRI, ultrasound and surrogate markers were also discussed. Finally, structures to develop future criteria were considered. Conclusions Limitations in current classification criteria and definitions for vasculitis have been identified and suggestions provided for improvement. Additionally it is proposed that, in combination with the updated evidence, these should form the basis of future attempts to develop and validate revised criteria and definitions of vasculitis. Show less
