Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Spinal Diseases: HELP
Articles by Paula Valente
Based on 4 articles published since 2008
||||

Between 2008 and 2019, Paula Valente wrote the following 4 articles about Spinal Diseases.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
1 Guideline Portuguese recommendations for the use of biological therapies in patients with axial spondyloarthritis - 2016 update. 2017

Machado, Pedro / Cerqueira, Marcos / Ávila-Ribeiro, Pedro / Aguiar, Renata / Bernardo, Alexandra / Sepriano, Alexandre / Águeda, Ana / Cordeiro, Ana / Raposo, Ana / Rodrigues, Ana M / Barcelos, Anabela / Malcata, Armando / Lopes, Carina / Vaz, Cláudia C / Nour, Dolores / Godinho, Fátima / Alvarenga, Fernando / Pimentel-Santos, Fernando / Canhão, Helena / Santos, Helena / Cunha, Inês / Neves, Joana Sousa / Fonseca, João Eurico / Gomes, João Lagoas / Tavares-Costa, José / Costa, Lúcia / Cunha-Miranda, Luís / Maurício, Luís / Cruz, Margarida / Afonso, Maria Carmo / Santos, Maria José / Bernardes, Miguel / Valente, Paula / Figueira, Ricardo / Pimenta, Sofia / Ramiro, Sofia / Pedrosa, Teresa / Costa, Tiago Afonso / Vieira-Sousa, Elsa. ·University College London, London, UK. · Rheumatology Department, Unidade Local de Saúde do Alto Minho, Hospital Conde de Bertiandos, Ponte de Lima, Portugal. · Rheumatology and Metabolic Bone Diseases Department, Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Norte, Hospital de Santa Maria, Lisboa, Portugal. · Rheumatology Department, Centro Hospitalar do Baixo Vouga, Hospital de Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal. · Rheumatology Department, Centro Hospitalar de S. João, Porto, Portugal. · NOVA Medical School, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal. · Rheumatology Department, Hospital Garcia de Orta, Almada, Portugal. · Rheumatology Department, Centro Hospitalar de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal. · CEDOC, EpiDoC Unit, NOVA Medical School and National School of Public Health, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal. · Rheumatology Department, Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal. · CEDOC, EpiDoC Unit, NOVA Medical School and National School of Public Health, Universidade Nova de Lisboa; Rheumatology Department, Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Ocidental, Hospital de Egas Moniz, Lisboa, Portugal. · Rheumatology Department, Unidade Local de Saúde da Guarda, Guarda, Portugal. · Clínica Intregare Terapêutica - Fortaleza: Clínica da Família, Fortaleza, Brasil. · Consultório Privado de Reumatologia, Portugal. · Instituto Português de Reumatologia, Lisboa, Portugal. · Rheumatology and Metabolic Bone Diseases Department, Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Norte, Hospital de Santa Maria; Rheumatology Research Unit, Instituto de Medicina Molecular, Faculty of Medicine, University of Lisbon, Lisbon Academic Medical Centre, Lisbon, P. · Rheumatology Department, Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Ocidental, Hospital de Egas Moniz, Lisboa, Portugal. · Centro Hospitalar de Entre o Douro e Vouga, Hospital de São Sebastião, Santa Maria da Feira, Portugal. · Centro Hospitalar do Funchal, Funchal, Madeira, Portugal. · NOVA Medical School, Universidade Nova de Lisboa; Department of Rheumatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands. ·Acta Reumatol Port · Pubmed #28894079.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To update the recommendations for the treatment of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) with biological therapies, endorsed by the Portuguese Society of Rheumatology. METHODS: These treatment recommendations were formulated by Portuguese rheumatologists based on literature evidence and consensus opinion. At a national meeting, the 7 recommendations included in this document were discussed and updated. A draft of the full text of the recommendations was then circulated and suggestions were incorporated. A final version was again circulated before publication and the level of agreement among Portuguese Rheumatologists was anonymously assessed using an online survey. RESULTS: A consensus was achieved regarding the initiation, assessment of response and switching of biological therapies in patients with axSpA. In total, seven recommendations were produced. The first recommendation is a general statement indicating that biological therapy is not a first-line drug treatment option and should only be used after conventional treatment has failed. The second recommendation is also a general statement about the broad concept of axSpA adopted by these recommendations that includes both non-radiographic and radiographic axSpA. Recommendations 3 to 7 deal with the definition of active disease (including the recommended threshold of 2.1 for the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score [ASDAS] or the threshold of 4 [0-10 scale] for the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index [BASDAI]), conventional treatment failure (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs being the first-line drug treatment), assessment of response to treatment (based on an ASDAS improvement  of at least 1.1 units or a BASDAI improvement of at least 2 units [0-10 scale] or at least 50%), and strategy in the presence of an inadequate response (where switching is recommended) or in the presence of long-term remission (where a process of biological therapy optimization can be considered, either a gradual increase in the interval between doses or a decrease of each dose of the biological therapy). CONCLUSION: These recommendations may be used for guidance in deciding which patients with axSpA should be treated with biological therapies. They cover a rapidly evolving area of therapeutic intervention. As more evidence becomes available and more biological therapies are licensed, these recommendations will have to be updated.

2 Guideline Portuguese recommendations for the use of biological therapies in patients with axial spondyloarthritis--December 2011 update. 2012

Machado, Pedro / Bernardo, Alexandra / Cravo, Ana Rita / Rodrigues, Ana / Malcata, Armando / Nour, Dolores / Vieira-Sousa, Elsa / Godinho, Fátima / Pimentel, Fernando / Canhão, Helena / Santos, Helena / Cunha, Inês / Fonseca, João Eurico / Costa, José / Costa, Lúcia / Cunha-Miranda, Luís / Maurício, Luís / Cruz, Margarida / Santos, Maria José / Bernardes, Miguel / Bogas, Mónica / Valente, Paula / Ramiro, Sofia / Barcelos, Anabela / Anonymous1630731. ·Serviço de Reumatologia, Hospitais da Universidade de Coimbra, Praceta Prof. Mota Pinto, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal. pedrommcmachado@gmail.com ·Acta Reumatol Port · Pubmed #22781513.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To develop recommendations for the treatment of axial spondyloarthritis with biological therapies, endorsed by the Portuguese Society of Rheumatology. METHODS: These treatment recommendations were formulated by Portuguese rheumatologists based on literature evidence and consensus opinion. A draft of the recommendations and supporting evidence was first circulated to all Portuguese rheumatologists and their suggestions were incorporated in the draft. Secondly, at a national meeting the recommendations were presented, discussed and revised. Finally, the document resulting from this meeting was again circulated to all Portuguese rheumatologists, who anonymously voted online on the level of agreement with the recommendations. RESULTS: A consensus was achieved regarding the initiation, assessment of response and switching biological therapies in patients with axial spondyloarthritis. CONCLUSION: These recommendations may be used for guidance in deciding which patients with axial spondyloarthritis should be treated with biological therapies. They cover a rapidly evolving area of therapeutic intervention. As more evidence becomes available and more biological therapies are licensed, these recommendations will have to be updated.

3 Guideline 2011 Portuguese recommendations for the use of biological therapies in patients with psoriatic arthritis. 2012

Machado, Pedro / Bogas, Mónica / Ribeiro, Ana / Costa, José / Neto, Adriano / Sepriano, Alexandre / Raposo, Ana / Cravo, Ana Rita / Vilar, António / Furtado, Carolina / Ambrósio, Catarina / Miguel, Cláudia / Vaz, Cláudia / Catita, Cristina / Nour, Dolores / Araújo, Domingos / Vieira-Sousa, Elsa / Teixeira, Filipa / Brandão, Filipe / Canhão, Helena / Cordeiro, Inês / Gonçalves, Inês / Ferreira, Joana / Fonseca, João Eurico / da Silva, José Alberto Pereira / Romeu, José / Ferreira, Júlia / Costa, Lúcia / Maurício, Luís / Cunha-Miranda, Luís / Parente, Manuela / Coutinho, Margarida / Cruz, Margarida / Oliveira, Margarida / Salvador, Maria João / Santos, Maria José / Pinto, Patrícia / Valente, Paula / Abreu, Pedro / Roque, Raquel / Ramiro, Sofia / Capela, Susana / Las, Vera / Barcelos, Anabela / Anonymous1620731. ·Serviço de Reumatologia, Hospitais da Universidade de Coimbra, Praceta Prof. Mota Pinto, 3000-075 Coimbra, Portugal. pedrommcmachado@gmail.com ·Acta Reumatol Port · Pubmed #22781512.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To develop recommendations for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) with biological therapies, endorsed by the Portuguese Society of Rheumatology. METHODS: These treatment recommendations were formulated by Portuguese rheumatologists based on literature evidence and consensus opinion. A draft of the recommendations was first circulated to all Portuguese rheumatologists and their suggestions were incorporated in the draft. At a national meeting the recommendations were discussed and all attending rheumatologists voted on the level of agreement for each recommendation. A second draft was again circulated before publication. RESULTS: A consensus was achieved regarding the initiation, assessment of response and switching biological therapies in patients with PsA. Specific recommendations were developed for several disease domains: peripheral arthritis, axial disease, enthesitis and dactylitis. CONCLUSION: These recommendations may be used for guidance in deciding which patients with PsA should be treated with biological therapies. They cover a rapidly evolving area of therapeutic intervention. As more evidence becomes available and more biological therapies are licensed, these recommendations will have to be updated.

4 Article Effectiveness of early adalimumab therapy in psoriatic arthritis patients from Reuma.pt - EARLY PsA. 2017

Santos, Helena / Eusébio, Mónica / Borges, Joana / Gonçalves, Diana / Ávila-Ribeiro, Pedro / Faria, Daniela Santos / Lopes, Carina / Rovisco, João / Águeda, Ana / Nero, Patrícia / Valente, Paula / Cravo, Ana Rita / Santos, Maria José. ·Instituto Português de Reumatologia. · Centro Hospitalar de São João. · Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Norte. · ULSAM. · Hospital de Egas Moniz-CHLO. · Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra. · Centro Hospitalar do Baixo Vouga. · Hospital CUF Descobertas. · Centro Hospitalar Entre o Douro e Vouga. · AbbVie. · Hospital Garcia de Orta. ·Acta Reumatol Port · Pubmed #29342473.

ABSTRACT: Objective To compare outcomes in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients initiating adalimumab (ADA), with short- and long-term disease duration and to evaluate the potential effect of concomitant conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) or glucocorticoids. Methods Analyses included adult PsA patients registered in the Rheumatic Diseases Portuguese Register (Reuma.pt) between June 2008-June 2016 who received ADA for ≥3 months. Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) response, tender and swollen joint count, inflammatory parameters, patient (PtGA) and physician global assessment (PhGA), Disease Activity Score-28 joints (DAS28), and Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) were compared between patients with <5 years of disease (early PsA) and those with ≥5 years of disease duration (late PsA). Time to achieving PsARC response was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results Of 135 PsA patients treated with ADA, 126 had information on disease duration (earlyPsA, n=41). PsARC response was achieved by 72.9% of the patients (88.0% early PsA vs 62.2% late PsA; P=0.022) after 3 months and by 85.4% after 24 months (100% early PsA vs 75.9% late PsA; P=0.044). Early PsA patients achieved significantly less painful joints (2.7 vs 6.7, p=0.006), lower mean C-reactive protein (0.5 mg/dL vs 1.3 mg/dL; P=0.011), and PhGA (18.3 vs 28.1; P=0.020) at 3 months. In the long term, early PsA patients also had fewer swollen joints (0.3 vs 1.7; P=0.030) and lower PhGA (6.3 vs 21.9; P<0.001), C-reactive protein (0.4 mg/dL vs 1.0 mg/dL; P=0.026), and DAS28 (2.2 vs 3.2; P=0.030). HAQ-DI decreased in both groups reaching a mean value at 24 months of 0.4 and 0.8 (P=ns) in early and late PsA, respectively. Early PsA patients obtained PsARC response more rapidly than late PsA (3.8 and 7.4 months, respectively; P=0.008). Concomitant csDMARDs showed clinical benefit (2-year PsARC response, 88.3% vs 60.0%; P=0.044). Concomitant glucocorticoids had no effect on PsARC response over 2 years of follow-up. Persistence on ADA was similar in both groups. Conclusion Early PsA patients had a greater chance of improvement after ADA therapy and better functional outcome, and achieved PsARC response more rapidly than late PsA. In this cohort, comedication with csDMARDs was beneficial over 2 years.